[arin-ppml] LAST CALL for Recommended Draft Policy ARIN-2016-3: Alternative Simplified Criteria for Justifying Small IPv4 Transfers

[Martin Hannigan]

Makes sense to me and I'm the penultimate editorial change hater.

Best,

-M<


On Tue, Apr 18, 2017 at 21:30 Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com> wrote:

>
> > On Apr 18, 2017, at 17:01 , Brett Frankenberger <rbf+arin-ppml at panix.com>
> wrote:
> >
> >> The ARIN Advisory Council (AC) met on 05 April 2017 and decided to
> >> send the following Recommended Draft Policy to Last Call:
> >>
> >> Recommended Draft Policy ARIN-2016-3: Alternative Simplified Criteria
> for
> >> Justifying Small IPv4 Transfers
> >>
> >> 8.5.7 Alternative Additional IPv4 Address Block Criteria
> >>
> >> In lieu of 8.5.5 and 8.5.6, organizations may qualify for additional
> IPv4
> >> address blocks by demonstrating 80% utilization of their currently
> >> allocated space. If they do so, they qualify to receive one or more
> >> transfers up to the total size of their current ARIN IPv4 address
> holdings,
> >> with a maximum size of /16.
> >>
> >> An organization may qualify via 8.5.7 for a total of a /16 equivalent in
> >> any 6 month period.
> >
> > Little late in the game for this, I know, but this language appears
> > ambiguous as to whether or not end-users are permitted to use this
> > policy.  "Organizations" is inclusive of end users, but "allocated" (in
> > "allocated space") could be read to exclude organizations that only
> > have assignments.  Given the general intent of other 8.x policies to
> > include end users and providers, I would assume that is the intent here
> > (both other 8.x policies generally don't mention allocations without
> > assignments or vice versa).  Perhaps "allocated" should be edited to
> > read "allocated or assigned" or something similar.  (Or "transferred,
> > allocated, or assigned" to maintain consistency with 8.3 and 8.4.)
> >
> > Maybe it's not an issue; perhaps ARIN could comment as to whether or
> > not, if this policy were implemented as currently written, they would
> > allow end-users to qualify for transfers under 8.5.7.
> >
> > I support this policy if it applies equally to end users and providers.
> >
> >     — Brett
>
> I agree that is the intent and I will attempt to get the words “or
> assigned” added
> to the policy before it is recommended to the board. I believe this to be
> an
> appropriate editorial change. Note, I do not speak for the AC in this
> regard, it
> is just my personal opinion and a statement of what I intend to do in the
> upcoming
> AC meeting, nothing more.
>
> Owen
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20170419/f69ac3ba/attachment.htm>