[arin-ppml] Draft Policy ARIN-2020-2: Grandfathering of Organizations Removed from Waitlist by Implementation of ARIN-2019-16

[A N]

Hi all,

Alyssa and I (co-shepherds for this policy) have reviewed all of the
comments. There are 18 comments in favour of the spirit of this policy, and
5 against.

Many of these comments express support for removing the restriction on
total holdings for a grandfathered organization, because this was not a
restriction when they were originally placed on the list.

As such, the amended proposal would look like this:

ARIN will restore organizations that were removed from the waitlist at the
adoption of ARIN-2019-16 to their previous position (STRIKE THIS: if their
total holdings of IPv4 address space amounts to a /18 or less.) The maximum
size aggregate that a reinstated organization may qualify for is a /22.

All restored organizations extend their 2 year approval by [number of
months between July 2019 and implementation of new policy]. Any requests
met through a transfer will be considered fulfilled and removed from the
waiting list.

Thoughts?

-Anita Nikolich

On Fri, Jul 24, 2020 at 4:09 PM Isaiah Olson <isaiah at olson-network.com>
wrote:

> Hi all,
>
>
>
> On behalf of my organization, I would also like to voice support for this
> policy. As much as I find some arguments against the policy compelling,
> namely that nobody is guaranteed to receive any space within any kind of
> time frame when using the waiting list, I think it’s pretty clear to the
> community that an error was made in moving the target out from underneath
> companies who had already been patiently waiting on the list in accordance
> with the requirements at the time they were added.
>
>
>
> As far as implementation details, I absolutely believe that two of the
> most important measures to prevent fraud were the introduction of the /22
> limit and the 60 month waiting period to transfer wait list issued space.
> Although we may have erred in retroactively removing orgs based on the new
> /20 limit for total space held, I think that the grandfathered orgs should
> be subject to the same treatment as the orgs who remained on the list after
> 2019-16 was implemented. Otherwise, I believe we would once again be
> creating a situation of unequal treatment for the orgs who had to reduce
> their request size to a /22 after the implementation of 2019-16, and were
> subject to the new 60 month waiting period upon issuance.
>
>
>
> With regards to the proposed /18 limit, I do find that there is little to
> support this arbitrary boundary when the original waitlist policy specified
> no such condition. Since we are remedying a one time error, I think that we
> shouldn’t be too particular about which of the aggrieved parties are
> allowed to make use of that remedy. Although I personally believe that most
> organizations holding greater than a /18 could probably afford to obtain
> space in other ways, I think the duty of ARIN to be fair and impartial
> requires us to take a bit broader view. Asking an organization to take a
> smaller allocation, or wait longer to transfer allocated space, seems to me
> to be a much less onerous retroactive application of new policy than
> drawing any boundary which results in complete ineligibility for some.
>
>
>
> Isaiah Olson
>
> Olson Tech, LLC
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20200818/c0789694/attachment.htm>