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

[David Farmer]

Jason,

I've been reviewing the record for ARIN-2016-2 and ARIN-2016-4;

https://www.arin.net/policy/proposals/2016_2.html
https://www.arin.net/policy/proposals/2016_4.html

Please remember that 2016-2 and 2016-4 have overlapping changes, this was
noted in the comments of 2016-4, prop-227 is 2016-2.

See my comments inline;

On Fri, Jan 26, 2018 at 10:26 AM, Jason Schiller <jschiller at google.com>
wrote:

> John,
>
> Looking back, I note that I have not made an ISP initial IPv4
> request after 02/21/2017 when the policy was changed.
>
> My previous ISP initial IPv4 requests asked for a
> 3 month, 12 month, and 18 month projection.
>
> I assumed this was to comply with "4.2.2.1.3. Three Months"
> that existed until 02/21/2017.
>
> Was this information used prior to 02/21/2017?
> Is this information used since 02/21/2017?
>
> Or is it ignored and collected only because the
> initial ISP  IPv4 request uses the same form as the
> subsequent  requests?
>
>
> "4.2.2.1.3. Three Months" disappeared on 02/21/2017
>
> That version was modified by:
> 2015-2
> 2016-1
> 2016-4
> 2016-5
> 2016-6
>

2016-2 had a slightly delayed implementation, it was impemented on
04/20/217, from the other policys approved at the same time.


> 2016-4 replaces section 4.2.2 text.
>
> It does not clearly state that it
> replaces, removes, or modifies
> any of the sub sections.
>

While it is unfortunate we didn't explicitly say that the sub-sections were
to be deleted, it however seems clear to me that was the intent.  The
Problem Statement makes it clear 4.2.2.1.1 is no longer valid, further
several of the sub-sections are obviously incoporated in the new text of
4.2.2 including 4.2.2.1.3, which based on the coment within 2016-4 was
removed because 2016-2 was also adopted.


> 4.2.2.1. ISP Requirements
> 4.2.2.1.1. Use of /24
> 4.2.2.1.2. Efficient Utilization
> 4.2.2.1.3. Three Months
>

Even if 4.2.2.1.3 wasn't removed ARIN-2016-2 would have clearlly changed it
to 24 months.


> 4.2.2.1.4. Renumber and Return
> 4.2.2.2. [Section Number Retired]
>
>
> I never noticed that the sub-section disappeared
> and assumed 2016-4 only changed the 4.2.2
> text.
>
>
> When I voiced my support for the 2016-4 it was
> with the understanding that (at that time):
>
> An ISP without a direct IPv4 block would
> automatically qualify for a /24, (without needing
> to go to an upstream and get IPv4 space and
> pressing it into service).
>
> Furthermore an ISP without a direct IPv4 block
> could get more than a /24 so long as it was did
> not exceed a 90 day supply (for non-transfers)
> or a 2 year supply (for transfers).
>

I don't know if you also support 2016-2, but it quite cleary changes the 90
day supply (for non-transfers) to a 2 year supply (for both transfers and
non-transfers), in fact this is conditionally noted in the comments for
2016-4.


> Staff understanding at the time, suggested
> the same conclusions.
>

I believe the overlapping changes were propperly implemneted, infact staff
and the AC work closely to ensure this happened correctly.


> __Jason
>

Thanks.

-- 
===============================================
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/20180130/430bda52/attachment.htm>