[arin-ppml] 2016-3 Revisited - anti-abuse clause

Kevin Blumberg kevinb at thewire.ca
Fri Feb 10 13:46:10 EST 2017


Jason,

I will rate on preference and look forward to more feedback from the community.

1) A – Leave the proposal AS IS.
2) C – Allow multiple requests inside of the 6-month window.

I’m curious on the transfers that have been done, how many organizations were approved for space more than once every 6 months?

I would prefer that edge cases be handled by the standard process and the number of variables be kept to a minimum here.

Thanks,

Kevin Blumberg

From: Jason Schiller [mailto:jschiller at google.com]
Sent: Friday, February 10, 2017 1:07 PM
To: Kevin Blumberg <kevinb at thewire.ca>
Cc: Scott Leibrand <scottleibrand at gmail.com>; ARIN-PPML List <arin-ppml at arin.net>
Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] 2016-3 Revisited - anti-abuse clause

Kevin,

Yes, A is the current proposed text.

B, which you are not comfortable with, allows you to come back and re-certify under what is currently used for approving ARIN space for ISP slow start, as was the original intent.

C, yes, but I will restate for clarity.
- an org has a /19 that is 80%+ utilized
- they get transfer pre-authorization for up to a /19 within two years of today 02/10/2017
- they complete one or more transfers and transfer in a /19 equivalent by 04/10/2017
- on 05/10/2017 they demonstrate 80%+ total utilization (the /19 they held, plus the /19 equivalent transferred in)
- They get transfer pre-authorization for up to a /18 within two years of 05/10/2017

I would actually like to take option D off the table, and instead have a separate discussion of the proper size for the time window.  3 months, 6 months, 1 year, 18 months, 2 years...

I think the timing is impacted by who can come back more frequently and how much documentation is needed.

I am personally more comfortable making the window longer, and having a more detailed utilization justification required for coming back inside the window.

__Jason


On Fri, Feb 10, 2017 at 12:31 PM, Kevin Blumberg <kevinb at thewire.ca<mailto:kevinb at thewire.ca>> wrote:
Jason,

In regards to A that would be the presumed assumption of the existing text correct?

I’m not comfortable with B.

In regards to C the intent would be to allow someone who has a /19 to get a /18 and then as an example three months later come back for a /17 once they have shown 80 percent of the /18?

There is another option.

D) you can use this policy once every 3 months

Thanks,

Kevin Blumberg




From: ARIN-PPML [mailto:arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net<mailto:arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net>] On Behalf Of Jason Schiller
Sent: Tuesday, February 7, 2017 2:54 PM
To: Scott Leibrand <scottleibrand at gmail.com<mailto:scottleibrand at gmail.com>>
Cc: ARIN-PPML List <arin-ppml at arin.net<mailto:arin-ppml at arin.net>>
Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] 2016-3 Revisited - anti-abuse clause

We have a few options on the table and only a few voices in the discussion...

I'd like to quickly outline the options, and see if we can get more people to weigh in and either note they object to one or more options, are ambivalent to one or more options, or support one or more options (with some preference).


1. demonstrate 80% utilization on average for all your IP space
2. get pre-authorization for 1 or more transfers up to double your current holdings over then two years
2.1. this is limited to a /16

A. you can use this policy once every 6 months

B. If you need to use this policy more than once every 6 months you need to also demonstrate growth equalling half what you have transferred since you last used this policy.

C. you can use this policy to transfer a total of up to a /16

Where do you stand on A, B or C?

__Jason


On Fri, Feb 3, 2017 at 7:01 PM, Scott Leibrand <scottleibrand at gmail.com<mailto:scottleibrand at gmail.com>> wrote:
That would be a significant improvement on the current ("An organization may only qualify under 8.5.7 once every 6 months.") text.  I would be equally fine with this text ("No more than a total of a /16 equivalent may be transferred under these provisions within any 6 month period." or similar) or with Jason's ("An organization may only qualify under 8.5.7 once every 6 months, unless they can also demonstrate growth of IPv4 utilization of at least half of the amount of specified transfers since the previous transfer pre-authorization or approval.")

Thanks,
Scott

On Fri, Feb 3, 2017 at 2:22 PM, Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com<mailto:owen at delong.com>> wrote:
Simple to resolve for the 6-month horizon —

… Such that no more than a total of a /16 equivalent may be transferred under these provisions within any 6 month period. …

Owen

> On Feb 3, 2017, at 07:19 , David R Huberman <daveid at panix.com<mailto:daveid at panix.com>> wrote:
>
>
> I thought of a possible problem with the anti-abuse language -- all versions of it.  Let me talk it out.
>
> An organization has a /19.
> It has growing products, and wants another /19 for its 1 or 2 year need.
> It wants to avail itself of the new language.
> It is able to buy a /20 from Buyer A, and a /20 from Buyer B.
>
> It closes the deal with Buyer A first, and transfers at ARIN using the proposed language.
>
> How does it use any version we've discussed (Jason's various proposals, the current text, etc) to transfer the space it buys from Buyer B?
>
>
> (In all discussion, yes, you can always use the other sections of 8.5, but let's stick to the spirit of this policy language, which is meant to help smaller and mid-size networks double their holdings without needs testing.)
> _______________________________________________
> PPML
> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
> the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML at arin.net<mailto: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<mailto: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<mailto: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<mailto: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<mailto: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<mailto:info at arin.net> if you experience any issues.



--
_______________________________________________________
Jason Schiller|NetOps|jschiller at google.com<mailto:jschiller at google.com>|571-266-0006<tel:(571)%20266-0006>




--
_______________________________________________________
Jason Schiller|NetOps|jschiller at google.com<mailto:jschiller at google.com>|571-266-0006

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20170210/1d97eb2f/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list