[arin-ppml] Draft Policy ARIN-2017-8: Amend Community Networks

[David Farmer]

Based on private feedback I have made some grammatical correction,
primarily in section 2.11;

Additional feedback is appreciated.

-----

After taking into account the discussion of ARIN-2017-8 preceding and
during ARIN 40, here are the proposed revisions to the Problem and Policy
Statements for ARIN-2017-8: Amend Community Networks.

Note the name of the policy is being changed to account for the expansion
of the scope of policy changes beyond just the definition of a Community
Network.

Following initial comments or suggestions, I will move this forward as an
official update to the Draft Policy in a week or so.

Thanks.

-----

Problem Statement:

The Community Networks section of the NRPM has only been used once since
implementation in January 2010. Proposal ARIN-2016-7, to increase the
number of use cases, was abandoned by the Advisory Council due to lack of
feedback. Proposal ARIN 2017-2, to remove all mention of community networks
from NRPM was met with opposition by the community. Many responded that the
definition of "community network" was too narrow, which could be the reason
for lack of uptake.

In the discussion at ARIN 40, it was clear that more than just the
definition of a community network needs to be revised and that community
networks need to have allocations and not assignments made to them.

Policy statement:

Replace section 2.11 with the following;

2.11 Community Network


*A community network is deployed, operated, and governed by its users, for
the purpose of providing free or low-cost connectivity to the community it
services. Users of the network or other volunteers must play a primary role
in the governance of the organization, whereas other functions may be
handled by either paid staff or volunteers.*
Rename section 6.5.9 and revise the last sentence as follows;

6.5.9. Community Network *Allocations*

While community networks would normally be considered to be ISP type
organizations under existing ARIN criteria, they tend to operate on much
tighter budgets and often depend on volunteer labor. As a result, they tend
to be much smaller and more communal in their organization rather than
provider/customer relationships of commercial ISPs. This section seeks to
provide *a* policy that is more friendly to those environments by
allowing *community
network to receive a smaller allocation than other LIRs or commercial ISPs.*

Replace section 6.5.9.2 and 6.5.9.3 with the following;








*6.5.9.2. Allocation SizeCommunity Networks are eligible only to receive an
allocation of /40 of IPv6 resources under this section. Community Networks
that wish to receive a larger initial allocation or any subsequent
allocations must qualify as a regular LIR, see sections 6.5.2 or 6.5.3
respectively.  6.5.9.3. Reassignments by Community NetworksSimilar to other
LIRs, Community Networks shall make reassignments to end-users in
accordance with applicable policies, in particular, but not limited to
sections 6.5.4 and 6.5.5. However, they shall not reallocate resources to
other organizations.*
Comments:

Timetable for implementation: Immediate

-- 
===============================================
David Farmer               Email:farmer 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
===============================================
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20180116/d7807f51/attachment.htm>