[arin-ppml] Recommended Draft Policy ARIN-2016-1: Reserved Pool Transfer Policy

Tue Jun 28 21:12:02 EDT 2016

I support this proposal as written.

James

On Mon, Jun 27, 2016 at 8:24 AM, Chris Spears <cspears.lists at gmail.com>
wrote:

> I support this proposal as written.
>
> On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 12:13 PM, ARIN <info at arin.net> wrote:
> > On 16 June 2016 the ARIN Advisory Council (AC) advanced the following
> Draft
> > Policy to Recommended Draft Policy status:
> >
> > ARIN-2016-1: Reserved Pool Transfer Policy
> >
> > The text of the Recommended Draft Policy is below, and may also be found
> at:
> > https://www.arin.net/policy/proposals/2016_1.html
> >
> > You are encouraged to discuss all Recommended Draft Policies on PPML
> prior
> > to their presentation at the next ARIN Public Policy Consultation (PPC).
> > PPML and PPC discussions are invaluable to the AC when determining
> community
> > consensus.
> >
> > The PDP can be found at:
> > https://www.arin.net/policy/pdp.html
> >
> > Draft Policies and Proposals under discussion can be found at:
> > https://www.arin.net/policy/proposals/index.html
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Communications and Member Services
> > American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN)
> >
> > Recommended Draft Policy ARIN-2016-1: Reserved Pool Transfer Policy
> >
> > Date: 21 June 2016
> >
> > AC assessment of conformance with the Principles of Internet Number
> Resource
> > Policy:
> >
> > This proposal enables fair and impartial number resource administration
> by
> > ensuring that IPv4 resources, which are specially designated for critical
> > infrastructure and IPv6 transition, are readily available for many years
> > into the future. This is done by ensuring the resources remain in their
> > originally designated pool rather than being moved into the general IPv4
> > address pool via a transfer.  This proposal is technically sound and is
> > supported by the community.
> >
> > Problem Statement:
> >
> > Section 8 of the current NRPM does not distinguish between the transfer
> of
> > blocks from addresses that have been reserved for specific uses and other
> > addresses that can be transferred. In sections 4.4 and 4.10 there are
> > specific address blocks set aside, based on the need for critical
> > infrastructure and IPv6 transitions. Two issues arise if transfers of
> > reserved address space occur under the current language of section 8.
> First,
> > if transfers of 4.4 or 4.10 space occur under the current policy
> > requirements set forth in sections 8.3 and 8.4, the recipients will be
> able
> > to acquire space that was originally reserved for a specific purpose
> without
> > ever providing evidence that they will be using the space for either
> > critical infrastructure or IPv6 transition. Second, if we allow an
> > allocation or assignment from the block reserved in section 4.10 to be
> > transferred out of the region, it would complicate the single aggregate
> from
> > which providers are being asked to allow in block sizes smaller than a
> /24.
> > This policy would limit the transfer of addresses from reserved pools.
> >
> > Policy statement:
> >
> > Add to Section 8.3 and Section 8.4 under the "Conditions on source of the
> > transfer:"
> >
> > Address resources from a reserved pool (including those designated in
> > Section 4.4 and 4.10) are not eligible for transfer.
> >
> > Timetable for implementation: Immediate
> >
> > ##########
> >
> > ARIN STAFF & LEGAL ASSESSMENT
> > Draft Policy ARIN-2016-1
> > RESERVED POOL TRANSFER POLICY
> > https://www.arin.net/policy/proposals/2016_1.html
> >
> > Date of Assessment: 13 June 2016
> > ___
> > 1. Summary (Staff Understanding)
> >
> > This policy would make IPv4 addresses issued under NRPM 4.4 and 4.10
> > ineligible for transfer inside the NRPM 8.3 and 8.4 transfer policies.
> > ___
> > 2. Comments
> >
> > A. ARIN Staff Comments
> >
> > * If this policy is implemented, ARIN staff would not allow NRPM 8.3 and
> 8.4
> > transfers to include IPv4 addresses previously issued under NRPM 4.4 and
> > 4.10 policies.
> >
> > * ARIN staff would continue to allow IPv4 addresses previously issued
> under
> > NRPM 4.4 and 4.10 to be included in Merger and Acquisition (NRPM 8.2)
> > transfers.
> >
> > * This policy could be implemented as written.
> >
> > B. ARIN General Counsel – Legal Assessment
> >
> > The policy does not create a material legal issue. It should be noted
> that
> > ARIN does permit transfers of IPV4 resources pursuant to 8.3 and 8.4.
> This
> > policy is an exception to that transferability and is consistent with the
> > intent and of the policy by which these allocations were made.
> > ___
> > 3. Resource Impact
> >
> > Implementation of this policy would have minimal resource impact. It is
> > estimated that implementation would occur within 3 months after
> ratification
> > by the ARIN Board of Trustees. The following would be needed in order to
> > implement:
> >
> > * Updated guidelines and internal procedures
> >
> > * Staff training
> > ___
> > 4. Proposal / Draft Policy Text Assessed
> >
> > Draft Policy ARIN-2016-1
> > Reserved Pool Transfer Policy
> >
> > Date: 22 March 2016
> >
> > Problem Statement:
> >
> > Section 8 of the current NRPM does not distinguish between the transfer
> of
> > blocks from addresses that have been reserved for specific uses and other
> > addresses that can be transferred. In sections 4.4 and 4.10 there are
> > specific address blocks set aside, based on the need for critical
> > infrastructure and IPv6 transitions. Two issues arise if transfers of
> > reserved address space occur under the current language of section 8.
> First,
> > if transfers of 4.4 or 4.10 space occur under the current policy
> > requirements set forth in sections 8.3 and 8.4, the recipients will be
> able
> > to acquire space that was originally reserved for a specific purpose
> without
> > ever providing evidence that they will be using the space for either
> > critical infrastructure or IPv6 transition. Second, if we allow an
> > allocation or assignment from the block reserved in section 4.10 to be
> > transferred out of the region, it would complicate the single aggregate
> from
> > which providers are being asked to allow in block sizes smaller than a
> /24.
> > This policy would limit the transfer of addresses from reserved pools.
> >
> > Policy statement:
> >
> > Add to Section 8.3 and Section 8.4 under the "Conditions on source of the
> > transfer:"
> >
> > Address resources from a reserved pool (including those designated in
> > Section 4.4 and 4.10) are not eligible for transfer.
> >
> > Timetable for implementation: Immediate
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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.
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20160628/648e32e2/attachment.htm>