[arin-ppml] Thoughts on 2015-7

[Scott Leibrand]

I think the threshold is "unnecessarily difficult" rather than "too
difficult".

If we didn't have NRPM section 4 already, and had to set up rules for needs
assessment for transfers, I think we would end up with something a lot
closer to this draft policy than to the current section 4.  If so, that
would indicate that all the extra requirements in section 4 are probably no
longer serving a useful function, and just making transfer recipients' life
unnecessarily difficult.

-Scott

On Mon, Oct 5, 2015 at 12:50 PM, Azinger, Marla <Marla.Azinger at ftr.com>
wrote:

> I’ve seen it from all sizes.  I don’t see an issue.  If a large quantity
> of people stand up and say they struggle.  I’ll be surprised.  And the
> assumption its easier for larger entities than smaller is very off base.
> I’ve managed a variety of entity sizes and there are different variables at
> all levels that really create a level playing field.
>
>
>
> And not everyone has the same contracts.  I’ve seen a variety and in those
> varieties there can also be contingencies.
>
>
>
> That said, if the majority of people stand up and say it’s too difficult.
> Then so be it.
>
>
>
> Regards
>
> Marla Azinger
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Scott Leibrand [mailto:scottleibrand at gmail.com]
> *Sent:* Monday, October 05, 2015 12:29 PM
> *To:* Azinger, Marla <Marla.Azinger at FTR.com>
> *Cc:* Rob Seastrom <rs-lists at seastrom.com>; ppml at arin.net
> *Subject:* Re: [arin-ppml] Thoughts on 2015-7
>
>
>
> Reducing the burden on ARIN staff is not part of the problem statement for
> this proposal (though it might be a side effect, depending on how they
> implement it).  The main goal here is to reduce the administrative burden
> on organizations who need to acquire IPv4 space via transfer.  That burden
> may actually be higher for smaller entities who don't have experience with
> and processes in place for jumping through ARIN's hoops.
>
>
>
> I don't think this policy would have much impact on the ability of large
> well-funded entities to purchase as much address space as they like.
> Currently, those organizations simply write a contract that gives them full
> rights to the address space they're buying, and allows them to transfer the
> space with ARIN whenever they are ready to put it into use on their network
> (or can otherwise pass ARIN's needs justification tests).
>
>
>
> -Scott
>
>
>
>
>
> On Mon, Oct 5, 2015 at 11:45 AM, Azinger, Marla <Marla.Azinger at ftr.com>
> wrote:
>
> Does ARIN staff feel this is needed to support how they asses transfers?
>
> Right now I don't support this proposal.   Based on experience I don't see
> a problem.
>
> Additionally this could have a side effect of letting larger money endowed
> entities to purchase more address space faster and deplete the chances
> smaller entities had on the market.  This would shorten the life span of
> the v4 market.
>
> Regards
> Marla Azinger
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net [mailto:arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net] On
> Behalf Of Rob Seastrom
> Sent: Thursday, August 20, 2015 12:46 PM
> To: ppml at arin.net
> Subject: [arin-ppml] Thoughts on 2015-7
>
> Dear Colleagues,
>
> It's been almost two months since ARIN 2015-7 was submitted.  Anyone have
> thoughts on "Simplified requirements for demonstrated need for IPv4
> transfers"?
>
> The AC would love your input.
>
> Draft policy text follows:
>
> Draft Policy ARIN-2015-7
> Simplified requirements for demonstrated need for IPv4 transfers
>
> Date: 23 June 2015
>
> Problem statement:
>
> ARIN transfer policy currently inherits all its demonstrated need
> requirements for IPv4 transfers from NRPM sections 4. Because that section
> was written primarily to deal with free pool allocations, it is much more
> complicated than is really necessary for transfers. In practice, ARIN staff
> applies much more lenient needs assessment to section 8 IPv4 transfer
> requests than to free pool requests, as 24-month needs are much more
> difficult to assess to the same level of detail.
>
> This proposal seeks to dramatically simplify the needs assessment process
> for 8.3 transfers, while still allowing organizations with corner-case
> requirements to apply under existing policy if necessary.
>
> Policy statement:
>
> 8.1.x Simplified requirements for demonstrated need for IPv4 transfers
>
> IPv4 transfer recipients must demonstrate (and an officer of the
> requesting organization must attest) that they will use at least 50% of
> their aggregate IPv4 addresses (including the requested resources) on an
> operational network within 24 months.
>
> Organizations that do not meet the simplified criteria above may instead
> demonstrate the need for number resources using the criteria in section
> 4 of the NRPM.
>
> Comments:
>
> a. Timetable for implementation: Immediate
>
> b. Anything else
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> PPML
> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN
> Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML at arin.net).
> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
> Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.
>
> ________________________________
>
> This communication is confidential. Frontier only sends and receives email
> on the basis of the terms set out at
> http://www.frontier.com/email_disclaimer.
>
> _______________________________________________
> PPML
> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
> the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML at arin.net).
> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
> Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20151005/0e7f6ba4/attachment.htm>