[arin-ppml] Draft Policy ARIN-2017-9: Clarification of Initial Block Size for IPv4 ISP Transfers

[David Farmer]

Owen,

Yep, that was an editing error, it should have been;

4.2.2. Initial allocation to ISPs

All ISP organizations without direct assignments or allocations from ARIN
qualify for an initial allocation of a /24. Organizations may qualify for a
larger initial allocation by documenting how the requested allocation will
be utilized within 24 months.

On Thu, Jan 18, 2018 at 4:26 PM, Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com> wrote:

> I see no reason to move the boundary for an ISP initial allocation from
> /21 to /24.
>

Well that seems to be staff intrupretation if you are getting an initial
allocation via a transfer, how would you reslove this then?

Thanks.


> I certainly see no reason for “up to a /24” as there’s nothing smaller
> available and even if it were, it wouldn’t be useful in any foreseeable
> environment.
>
> Owen
>
> On Jan 18, 2018, at 2:21 PM, David Farmer <farmer at umn.edu> wrote:
>
> David,
>
> The resolution you suggest below seems like a different policy proposal to
> me, one with a significantly broader scope than this draft policy has.  But
> I think it is a valid question for the community to consider, it's just not
> really the problem statement in question for this Draft Policy.
>
> So, back within the scope of this Draft Policy as the shepherd, I plan to
> push forward Andrew's updated Problem Statement with a Policy Statement
> that harmonizes and simplifies the text in section 4.2.2 as an official
> update to this Draft Policy to get the conversation moving again.
>
> The current text of 4.2.2 is;
>
> 4.2.2. Initial allocation to ISPs
>
> All ISP organizations without direct assignments or allocations from ARIN
> qualify for an initial allocation of up to a /21, subject to ARIN's minimum
> allocation size. Organizations may qualify for a larger initial allocation
> by documenting how the requested allocation will be utilized within 24
> months. ISPs renumbering out of their previous address space will be given
> a reasonable amount of time to do so, and any blocks they are returning
> will not count against their utilization.
>
> The text "subject to ARIN's minimum allocation size" seems extraneous.
> And, post runout renumbering and returning any address space
> seems unlikely, so let's just eliminate that whole sentence.
>
> I propose we simplify that to the following;
>
> 4.2.2. Initial allocation to ISPs
>
> All ISP organizations without direct assignments or allocations from ARIN
> qualify for an initial allocation of up to a /24. Organizations may qualify
> for a larger initial allocation by documenting how the requested allocation
> will be utilized within 24 months.
>
> Below is the policy update that results;
>
> Thanks
>
> --------
>
> Draft Policy ARIN-2017-9: Clarification of Initial Block Size for IPv4 ISP
> Transfers
>
> Problem Statement:
>
> It was noted in the ARIN 40 Policy Experience Report, that there is an
> inconsistency in the initial block size for ISPs. Section 4.2.2 notes that
> the initial ISP block size should be /21 whereas the initial block size in
> 8.5.4 is noted as "minimum transfer size" which is effectively a /24. This
> causes ISP organizations to be approved for different initial block size
> depending on if they first apply for a transfer directly under section 8 or
> if they apply for a block under section 4.  This policy is intended to
> clarify this issue, by setting a consistent ISP initial IPv4 block size. It
> was noted that ARIN staff current operational practice is to allow
> qualified ISPs an initial /21 for Section 8 transfers when they first apply
> and are approved under section 4.  If an organization applies under section
> 8 first they are initially qualified for a /24, larger allocations require
> additional documentation as noted in 8.5.5.
>
> Policy Statement:
>
> Change section 4.2.2 as follows;
>
> 4.2.2. Initial allocation to ISPs
>
> All ISP organizations without direct assignments or allocations from ARIN
> qualify for an initial allocation of up to a /24. Organizations may qualify
> for a larger initial allocation by documenting how the requested allocation
> will be utilized within 24 months.
>
> Comments:
>
> Timetable for implementation: Immediate
>
>
> On Thu, Dec 7, 2017 at 11:37 PM, David Huberman <daveid at panix.com> wrote:
>
>> Thank you for the clarification.  I think the staff practice is a
>> reasonable approach and I don’t think change is needed in policy for this.
>>
>> The updated Problem Statement reveals the real issue here - the one we
>> need to figure out as a community.   What to do about all the requests each
>> month for IPv4 addresses under section 4?
>>
>> Is it time to pass a policy to direct staff to no longer accept section 4
>> requests (except the ones they still fill like critical infrastructure)? I
>> wonder what the downside of such a policy would be - anyone know?
>>
>>
>>
>> On Dec 7, 2017, at 11:47 PM, Andrew Dul <andrew.dul at quark.net> wrote:
>>
>> It was noted to me by ARIN staff, that this updated problem statement
>> doesn't accurately reflect ARIN's current practice.  Below I suggest
>> another updated problem statement.
>>
>> *Problem Statement: *
>> It was noted at the ARIN 40 Policy Experience Report, that there is an
>> inconsistency in the initial block size for ISPs. Section 4.2.2 notes that
>> the initial ISP block size should be /21 whereas the initial block size in
>> 8.5.4 is noted as "minimum transfer size" which is effectively a /24. This
>> causes ISP organizations to be approved for different initial block size
>> depending on if they first apply apply for a transfer directly under
>> section 8 or if they apply for a block under section 4.  This policy is
>> intended to clarify this issue, by setting a consistent ISP initial IPv4
>> block size. It was noted that ARIN staff current operational practice is to
>> allow qualified ISPs an initial /21 for Section 8 transfers when they first
>> apply and are approved under section 4.  If an organization applies under
>> section 8 first they are initially qualified for a /24, larger allocations
>> require additional documentation as noted in 8.5.5.
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> ===============================================
> David Farmer               Email:farmer at umn.edu
> Networking & Telecommunication Services
> Office of Information Technology
> University of Minnesota
> 2218 University Ave SE
> <https://maps.google.com/?q=2218+University+Ave+SE&entry=gmail&source=g>
>       Phone: 612-626-0815 <(612)%20626-0815>
> Minneapolis, MN 55414-3029   Cell: 612-812-9952 <(612)%20812-9952>
> ===============================================
> _______________________________________________
> 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.
>
>
>


-- 
===============================================
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/20180118/1af1626a/attachment.htm>