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

Andrew Dul andrew.dul at quark.net
Tue Aug 18 12:28:33 EDT 2020


I do not support the re-adding of organizations with any size of IPv4 
holdings back to the wait-list.

Speaking only for myself,

Andrew


On 8/18/2020 8:39 AM, Hayee Bokhari wrote:
> 
>
> Seems like a plan,
>
> Go for it.
>
> Regards
> Hayee Bokhari
> 514-341-1579 Ex 212
> 800-427-6012 Ex 212
> bokhari at cronomagic.com <mailto:bokhari at cronomagic.com>
> http://www.cronomagic.com
>
>     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 <mailto: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
>         <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.
>
> 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 
> <mailto: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
>     <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.
>
>
> 2020-08-1811:39:03
>
> Notice
> This communication is intended to be received only by the individual[s] or
> entity[s] to whom or to which it is addressed, and contains information
> which is confidential, privileged and subject to copyright. Any 
> unauthorized
> use, copying, review or disclosure is prohibited. Please notify the sender
> immediately if you have received this communication in error [by calling
> collect, if necessary] so that we can arrange for its return at our 
> expense.
> Thank you in advance for your anticipated assistance and cooperation.
>
>
> Cette communication est destinée uniquement à la personne ou à la personne
> morale à qui elle est adressée. Elle contient de l'information
> confidentielle, protégée par le secret professionnel et sujette à des 
> droits
> d'auteurs. Toute utilisation, reproduction, consultation ou 
> divulgation non
> autorisées sont interdites. Nous vous prions d'aviser immédiatement
> l'expéditeur si vous avez reçu cette communication par erreur (en 
> appelant à
> frais virés, si nécessaire), afin que nous puissions prendre des
> dispositions pour en assurer le renvoi à nos frais. Nous vous remercions à
> l'avance de votre coopération.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20200818/69d4eac2/attachment-0001.htm>


More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list