[arin-ppml] Revised/Retitled - Draft Policy ARIN-2018-4: Clarification on Temporary Sub-Assignments

Wed Aug 15 00:13:45 EDT 2018

> On Aug 14, 2018, at 06:43 , David Farmer <farmer at umn.edu> wrote:
> 
> Because of recent changes, editorial if I remember correctly, section 2.5 now reads as;
> 
> 2.5. Allocation, Assignment, Reallocation, Reassignment
> 
> Allocation - Address space delegated to an organization directly by ARIN for the purpose of subsequent distribution by the recipient organization to other parties.
> 
> Assignment - Address space delegated to an organization directly by ARIN for the exclusive use of the recipient organization.
> 
> Reallocation - Address space sub-delegated to an organization by an upstream provider for the purpose of subsequent distribution by the recipient organization to other parties.
> 
> Reassignment - Address space sub-delegated to an organization by an upstream provider for the exclusive use of the recipient organization.
> 
> This proposal essentially adds the following sentence to "Assignment" above.
> 
> A temporary assignment of address space provided to third parties shall not be considered a reassignment or a violation of the exclusive use criterion.
> 
> However, I propose the following minor change to that;
> 
> A temporary reassignment of address space provided to third parties shall not be considered a reassignment or a violation of the exclusive use criterion.

Here’s the problem…. You’re now saying “A temporary reassignment isn’t a reassignment”.

I realize that makes the language more consistent with our definitions, but it really doesn’t parse well.

I propose instead, that we say what we mean and avoid this problem altogether:

	Temporary use of address space by third parties with the permission of the registrant shall not be considered a reassignment
	or a violation of the exclusive use criterion.

> 
> Further, the sentence should also apply to "Reassignment". So, does the sentence also need to be added to "Reassignment"?  Or maybe add the following sentence to "Reassignment";
> 
> Excluding temporary reassignments, as discussed in the definition Assignment above. 

I’m not sure why we would need such a thing for reassignments from allocations. Since those are allowed, there’s really no benefit to failing to report them if reporting requirements would apply. If not, it’s just a no-op that adds confusion rather than removing it, IMHO.

Owen

> 
> Thanks
> 
> On Mon, Aug 13, 2018 at 12:39 PM, ARIN <info at arin.net <mailto:info at arin.net>> wrote:
> 
> The following has been revised and retitled:
> 
> * Draft Policy ARIN-2018-4: Clarification on Temporary Sub-Assignments
> 
> Formerly:
> 
> * Draft Policy ARIN-2018-4: Clarification on IPv6 Sub-Assignments
> 
> Revised text is below and can be found at:
> https://www.arin.net/policy/proposals/2018_4.html <https://www.arin.net/policy/proposals/2018_4.html>
> 
> You are encouraged to discuss all Draft Policies on PPML. The AC will evaluate the discussion in order to assess the conformance of this draft policy with ARIN's Principles of Internet number resource policy as stated in the Policy Development Process (PDP). Specifically, these principles are:
> 
> * Enabling Fair and Impartial Number Resource Administration
> * Technically Sound
> * Supported by the Community
> 
> The PDP can be found at:
> https://www.arin.net/policy/pdp.html <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 <https://www.arin.net/policy/proposals/index.html>
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Sean Hopkins
> Policy Analyst
> American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN)
> 
> 
> 
> Draft Policy ARIN-2018-4: Clarification on Temporary Sub-Assignments
> 
> Problem Statement:
> 
> When the policy was drafted, the concept of assignments/sub-assignments did not consider the use of IP addresses in hotspots, or the use of IP addresses by guests or employees in Bring Your Own Device (BYOD) and many other similar cases.
> 
> Additionally, the IETF has recently approved the use of a unique IPv6 /64 prefix per interface/host (RFC8273) instead of a unique address. This, for example, allows users to connect to a hotspot, receive a /64 such that they are "isolated" from other users (for reasons of security, regulatory requirements, etc.) and they can also use multiple virtual machines on their devices with a unique address for each one (within the same /64).
> 
> Section 2.5 (Definitions/Allocate and Assign), explicitly prohibits such assignments, stating that "Assignments... are not to be sub-assigned to other parties".
> 
> This proposal clarifies this situation in this regard and better define the concept, particularly considering new uses of IPv6 (RFC8273), by means of additional language added to the definition of an Assignment.
> 
> Note that the proposal text also incorporates changes made under an Editorial Change currently awaiting Board of Trustees review, available here: https://www.arin.net/policy/proposals/2017_11.html <https://www.arin.net/policy/proposals/2017_11.html>
> 
> Policy Statement:
> 
> Actual Text, Section 2.5:
> 
> • Assign - To assign means to delegate address space to an ISP or end-user, for specific use within the Internet infrastructure they operate. Assignments must only be made for specific purposes documented by specific organizations and are not to be sub-assigned to other parties.
> 
> New Text:
> 
> • Assignment - Address space delegated to an organization directly by ARIN for the exclusive use of the recipient organization. A temporary assignment of address space provided to third parties shall not be considered an assignment or a violation of the exclusive use criterion.
> 
> Comments
> 
> Timetable for implementation:
> 
> Immediate
> 
> Anything else:
> 
> Situation in other regions:
> 
> This situation, has already been corrected in RIPE, and the policy was updated in a similar way, even if right now there is a small discrepancy between the policy text that reached consensus and the RIPE NCC Impact Analysis. A new policy proposal has been submitted to amend that, and the text is the same as presented by this proposal at ARIN. Same text has also been submitted to AfriNIC, LACNIC and APNIC.
> _______________________________________________
> ARIN-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:
> https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml <https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml>
> Please contact info at arin.net <mailto:info at arin.net> if you experience any issues.
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> ===============================================
> David Farmer               Email:farmer at umn.edu <mailto:Email%3Afarmer at umn.edu>
> Networking & Telecommunication Services
> Office of Information Technology
> University of Minnesota   
> 2218 University Ave SE        Phone: 612-626-0815
> Minneapolis, MN 55414-3029   Cell: 612-812-9952
> ===============================================
> _______________________________________________
> ARIN-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:
> https://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/20180814/be0d9094/attachment.htm>