[arin-ppml] Fwd: Advisory Council Recommendation Regarding NRPM 4.1.8. Unmet Requests

Kevin Blumberg kevinb at thewire.ca
Fri May 10 16:13:19 EDT 2019


At the last meeting there was significant information given to the community and a very strong consensus that the Wait List should be limited to /22.

I don’t recall any discussion on the size of the ORG’s current number resources being a qualifier.

I haven’t seen the math behind the /20 boundary and believe it should be stricken as a requirement. The change to /22 was meant to limit abuse, not penalize legitimate requests.

Thanks,

Kevin Blumberg

From: ARIN-PPML <arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net> On Behalf Of Tom Pruitt
Sent: Friday, May 10, 2019 3:45 PM
To: arin-ppml at arin.net
Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Fwd: Advisory Council Recommendation Regarding NRPM 4.1.8. Unmet Requests

I do not support the new text, specifically the  limit of a /20 per organization.

The limiting of an organization to an aggregate of a /20 is a huge hinderance of the ability of a smaller ISP to compete.  A smaller ISP that can win business on service and cost could lose that same business due to simply recouping the IPv4 costs.   Large ISPs will often give the IPs away to win the business, and it costs them nothing as they received their IPV4 space for free.   Additionally, many smaller ISPs operate in outlying areas where IPv6 adoption will likely be slow, which will also hinder their ability to push IPv6.    I’m not sure at what point an organization becomes “large”, but the smaller organizations are the ones that will be hurt by this limit.

What happens to organizations that are currently on the wait list that have an aggregate of a /20 or more?  Do they still get  a /22.  Some of those organizations have been on the list for over a year.   Assuming they played by the rules and made decisions based on the assumption that they would get an allotment of IPv4 addresses, denying them any addresses after they have waited a year or more could be very detrimental to them. These policy changes and decisions affect the smaller entities greatly, and they need some clarity.



Thanks,
Tom Pruitt
Network Engineer
Stratus Networks

[stratus_networks_logo_FINAL]

From: ARIN-PPML <arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net<mailto:arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net>> On Behalf Of Andrew Dul
Sent: Monday, May 6, 2019 4:09 PM
To: arin-ppml at arin.net<mailto:arin-ppml at arin.net>
Subject: [arin-ppml] Fwd: Advisory Council Recommendation Regarding NRPM 4.1.8. Unmet Requests


Hello,

I'd like to bring your attention to another issue that may have been lost in the flurry of other emails.  We are currently in a 14 day feedback period for the AC's response to the Board's suspension of the wait-list.   Please note the following updated text for the wait-list.  Your comments on this updated text are welcome.

Thanks,

Andrew



===

If no such block is available, the organization will be provided the option to be placed on a waiting list of pre-qualified recipients, listing both the block size, for which the organization is qualified, which in the case of the waiting list shall not be larger than a /22, and the smallest block size acceptable to the organization. An organization may not be added to the waiting list if it already holds IPv4 resources amounting in aggregate to more than a /20 of address space. Resources received via section 4.1.8 may not be transferred within 60 months of the issuance date.


-------- Forwarded Message --------
Subject:

[arin-ppml] Advisory Council Recommendation Regarding NRPM 4.1.8. Unmet Requests

Date:

Mon, 29 Apr 2019 11:16:31 -0400

From:

ARIN <info at arin.net><mailto:info at arin.net>

To:

arin-ppml at arin.net<mailto:arin-ppml at arin.net>



Subject:

At their 16 January Meeting, the Board of Trustees suspended issuance of number resources under NRPM section 4.1.8.2. (Fulfilling Unmet Needs), and referred NRPM section 4.1.8 to the ARIN Advisory Council for their recommendation.

The Advisory Council has provided its recommendation, and per ARIN's Policy Development Process, the recommendation is hereby submitted to the Public Policy Mailing List for a community discussion period of 14 days, to conclude on 13 May.

Once completed, the Board of Trustees will review the AC’s recommendation and the PPML discussion.

The full text of the Advisory Council's recommendation is below.

Board of Trustees meeting minutes are available at:

https://www.arin.net/about/welcome/board/meetings/2019_0116/

For more details on the Policy Development Process, visit:

https://www.arin.net/participate/policy/pdp/

Regards,

Sean Hopkins
Policy Analyst
American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN)



Advisory Council recommendation:

In accordance with section 10.2 of the ARIN Policy Development Process, the ARIN Advisory Council recommends the following actions to the Board of Trustees in response to the Board’s suspension of part of the operation of sections 4.1.8, 4.1.8.1 and 4.1.8.2 of the Numbering Resource Policy Manual:

Replace section 4.1.8 as follows, then reinstate the full operation of sections 4.1.8, 4.1.8.1 and 4.1.8.2 immediately.

4.1.8. Unmet Requests

In the event that ARIN does not have a contiguous block of addresses of sufficient size to fulfill a qualified request, ARIN will provide the requesting organization with the option to specify the smallest block size they’d be willing to accept, equal to or larger than the applicable minimum size specified elsewhere in ARIN policy. If such a smaller block is available, ARIN will fulfill the request with the largest single block available that fulfills the request.

If no such block is available, the organization will be provided the option to be placed on a waiting list of pre-qualified recipients, listing both the block size, for which the organization is qualified, which in the case of the waiting list shall not be larger than a /22, and the smallest block size acceptable to the organization. An organization may not be added to the waiting list if it already holds IPv4 resources amounting in aggregate to more than a /20 of address space. Resources received via section 4.1.8 may not be transferred within 60 months of the issuance date.

Repeated requests, in a manner that would circumvent 4.1.6, are not allowed: an organization may only receive one allocation, assignment, or transfer every 3 months, but ARIN, at its sole discretion, may waive this requirement if the requester can document a change in circumstances since their last request that could not have been reasonably foreseen at the time of the original request, and which now justifies additional space. Qualified requesters whose request cannot be immediately met will also be advised of the availability of the transfer mechanism in section 8.3 as an alternative mechanism to obtain IPv4 addresses.
_______________________________________________
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
Please contact info at arin.net<mailto: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/20190510/4b1a5ed9/attachment-0002.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image003.png
Type: image/png
Size: 15673 bytes
Desc: image003.png
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20190510/4b1a5ed9/attachment-0002.png>


More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list