[arin-ppml] ARIN-PPML Digest, Vol 181, Issue 16

Eric Lee elee at mdtc.net
Fri Jul 17 12:36:08 EDT 2020


I don't necessarily think it's a lottery. It's a waitlist. If you meet the requirements and spend the time on the waitlist then the request eventually gets granted.

Now I think one good point that was brought up is if someone gets a transfer of IP addresses that might bounce them off the waitlist as they might not need or meet the requirements on the waitlist.

-----Original Message-----
From: ARIN-PPML <arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net> On Behalf Of arin-ppml-request at arin.net
Sent: Friday, July 17, 2020 11:00 AM
To: arin-ppml at arin.net
Subject: ARIN-PPML Digest, Vol 181, Issue 16

Send ARIN-PPML mailing list submissions to
	arin-ppml at arin.net

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
	https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
	arin-ppml-request at arin.net

You can reach the person managing the list at
	arin-ppml-owner at arin.net

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of ARIN-PPML digest..."


Today's Topics:

   1. Re: Draft Policy ARIN-2020-2: Grandfathering of Organizations
      Removed from Waitlist by Implementation of ARIN-2019-16 (Mike Burns)
   2. Re: Draft Policy ARIN-2020-2: Grandfathering of Organizations
      Removed from Waitlist by Implementation of ARIN-2019-16
      (Steven Ryerse)


----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message: 1
Date: Fri, 17 Jul 2020 10:59:00 -0400
From: "Mike Burns" <mike at iptrading.com>
To: <hostmaster at uneedus.com>,	<arin-ppml at arin.net>
Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Draft Policy ARIN-2020-2: Grandfathering of
	Organizations Removed from Waitlist by Implementation of ARIN-2019-16
Message-ID: <007301d65c4a$cdf466d0$69dd3470$@iptrading.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;	charset="iso-8859-7"

I support the policy as written and I do not believe we should prioritize small holders over large holders.
Large holders pay higher fees but I don't see the rationale behind favoring small  holders on the wait list.
All holders should be on equal footing, we never had a new-entrant reserve at ARIN and I think if that is something we want to do, it should be discussed openly and not inserted through the back door of waitlist policy.

Regards,
Mike



-----Original Message-----
From: ARIN-PPML <arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net> On Behalf Of hostmaster at uneedus.com
Sent: Thursday, July 16, 2020 7:59 AM
To: arin-ppml at arin.net
Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Draft Policy ARIN-2020-2: Grandfathering of Organizations Removed from Waitlist by Implementation of ARIN-2019-16

I am also against this proposal.

If we allow holders of larger blocks back onto the list, we take away blocks that should go to smaller holders.

The waiting list is NOT a lottery to be "won", and I think the policy should not change.

Albert Erdmann
Network Administrator
Paradise On Line Inc.


On Wed, 15 Jul 2020, Andrew Dul wrote:

> 
> I do not support the reintroduction of organizations onto the 
> wait-list who were removed due to having existing address holdings 
> larger than a /20.? Being on the wait-list was never a guarantee that 
> you would receive space.? The AC had to balance the various elements 
> of
block size and organizations who would be eligible to receive space under the updated policy and we were aware that the rules as implemented would prevent some organizations on the wait-list from receiving blocks going forward.
> 
> Speaking only for myself, not the AC
> 
> Andrew
> 
> On 6/19/2020 11:25 AM, Alyssa Moore wrote:
>       Hi folks,
>
>       There was some great discussion of this policy proposal at ARIN45.
We hear a wide range of views including:
>        1. Don't grandfather organizations. The new waitlist policy is
sound.?
>        2. Organizations that were on the waitlist before 2019-16 
> should be
eligible for their original request size (even if it exceeds the new limit
>           of a /22).?
>        3. Organizations that were on the waitlist before 2019-16 
> should
remain eligible if their holdings exceed a /20 OR a /18. The draft policy
>           under discussion specifies a?/18 total holdings for
grandfathered orgs, while the current waitlist policy (2019-16) specifies a /20.
>        4. Organizations that were on the waitlist before 2019-16 
> should be
eligible regardless of their total holdings because that was not a
>           restriction of the policy under which they originally 
> qualified
for the waitlist.?
>       ?There was general support to continue finessing this draft. If 
> you
have views on the above noted parameters, please make them known here.
> 
> For reference:
> 
> Old waitlist policy
>  1. Requester specifies smallest block they'd be willing to accept, 
> equal
to or larger than the applicable minimum size specified elsewhere in ARIN
>     policy.
>  2. Did not place a limit on the total existing IP address holdings of 
> a
party eligible for the waitlist.
>  3. Made resources issued from the waitlist ineligible for transfer 
> until after a period of 12 months. New Waitlist Policy  1. Limits the 
> size of block ARIN can issue on the waitlist to a /22.
>  2. Places a limit on the total existing IP address holdings of a 
> party
eligible for the waitlist at a /20 or less.
>  3. Makes resources issued from the waitlist ineligible for transfer 
> until after a period of 60 months.
> 
> Best,
> Alyssa
> 
> On Thu, Mar 26, 2020 at 3:35 PM David Farmer <farmer at umn.edu> wrote:
>       I support this policy and believe the policy development process 
> is
the proper place to handle this issue. However, this policy seems to
>       be implementable?as a one-time policy directive to ARIN Staff. 
> Once
implemented, by putting the effected?organizations?back on the waiting
>       list, it seems unnecessary to memorialized the text in the NRPM, 
> it
would immediately become extraneous and potentially?confusing to
>       future readers of the NRPM.
> Therefore, I would like?to recommend the Policy Statement?not be added 
> to the NRPM upon its implementation. I believe this to 
> be?consistent?with
the intent of the policy.? Otherwise, does ARIN Staff have procedural advice on how best to handle what seems like a one-time directive?
> 
> Thanks
> 
> On Tue, Mar 24, 2020 at 12:21 PM ARIN <info at arin.net> wrote:
>
>       Draft Policy ARIN-2020-2: Grandfathering of Organizations 
> Removed
from
>       Waitlist by Implementation of ARIN-2019-16
>
>       Problem Statement:
>
>       The implementation of the ARIN-2019-16 Advisory Council
Recommendation
>       Regarding NRPM 4.1.8: Unmet Requests caused some organizations to be
>       removed from the waiting list that were approved under the old
policy?s
>       eligibility criteria. These organizations should have been
grandfathered
>       when the waitlist was reopened to allow them to receive an
allocation of
>       IPv4 up to the new policy?s maximum size constraint of a /22.
>
>       Policy Statement: Update NRPM Section 4.1.8 as follows:
>
>       Add section 4.1.8.3 (temporary language in the NRPM to remain 
> until
the
>       policy objective is achieved)
>
>       Restoring organizations to the waitlist
>
>       ARIN will restore organizations that were removed from the 
> waitlist
at
>       the adoption of ARIN-2019-16 to their previous position 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.
>
>       Comments:
>
>       Timetable for implementation: Immediate
>
>       Anything Else: While attending ARIN 44 and discussing this with
other
>       community members the vast majority indicated that they agreed 
> that
some
>       organizations were treated unfairly. This proposal is a remedy.
>       _______________________________________________
>       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.
> 
> 
> 
> --
> ===============================================
> 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 
> ===============================================
> _______________________________________________
> 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.
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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.
> 
> 
>



------------------------------

Message: 2
Date: Fri, 17 Jul 2020 15:24:14 +0000
From: Steven Ryerse <SRyerse at eclipse-networks.com>
To: Mike Burns <mike at iptrading.com>, "hostmaster at uneedus.com"
	<hostmaster at uneedus.com>, "arin-ppml at arin.net" <arin-ppml at arin.net>
Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Draft Policy ARIN-2020-2: Grandfathering of
	Organizations Removed from Waitlist by Implementation of ARIN-2019-16
Message-ID: <030306a76446485f9d2df6f2a04b0df6 at eclipse-networks.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"

+1


Steven Ryerse
President 

sryerse at eclipse-networks.com | C: 770.656.1460
100 Ashford Center North | Suite 110 | Atlanta, Georgia 30338

      



-----Original Message-----
From: ARIN-PPML <arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net> On Behalf Of Mike Burns
Sent: Friday, July 17, 2020 10:59 AM
To: hostmaster at uneedus.com; arin-ppml at arin.net
Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Draft Policy ARIN-2020-2: Grandfathering of Organizations Removed from Waitlist by Implementation of ARIN-2019-16

I support the policy as written and I do not believe we should prioritize small holders over large holders.
Large holders pay higher fees but I don't see the rationale behind favoring small  holders on the wait list.
All holders should be on equal footing, we never had a new-entrant reserve at ARIN and I think if that is something we want to do, it should be discussed openly and not inserted through the back door of waitlist policy.

Regards,
Mike



-----Original Message-----
From: ARIN-PPML <arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net> On Behalf Of hostmaster at uneedus.com
Sent: Thursday, July 16, 2020 7:59 AM
To: arin-ppml at arin.net
Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Draft Policy ARIN-2020-2: Grandfathering of Organizations Removed from Waitlist by Implementation of ARIN-2019-16

I am also against this proposal.

If we allow holders of larger blocks back onto the list, we take away blocks that should go to smaller holders.

The waiting list is NOT a lottery to be "won", and I think the policy should not change.

Albert Erdmann
Network Administrator
Paradise On Line Inc.


On Wed, 15 Jul 2020, Andrew Dul wrote:

> 
> I do not support the reintroduction of organizations onto the 
> wait-list who were removed due to having existing address holdings 
> larger than a /20.? Being on the wait-list was never a guarantee that 
> you would receive space.? The AC had to balance the various elements 
> of
block size and organizations who would be eligible to receive space under the updated policy and we were aware that the rules as implemented would prevent some organizations on the wait-list from receiving blocks going forward.
> 
> Speaking only for myself, not the AC
> 
> Andrew
> 
> On 6/19/2020 11:25 AM, Alyssa Moore wrote:
>       Hi folks,
>
>       There was some great discussion of this policy proposal at ARIN45.
We hear a wide range of views including:
>        1. Don't grandfather organizations. The new waitlist policy is
sound.?
>        2. Organizations that were on the waitlist before 2019-16 
> should be
eligible for their original request size (even if it exceeds the new limit
>           of a /22).?
>        3. Organizations that were on the waitlist before 2019-16 
> should
remain eligible if their holdings exceed a /20 OR a /18. The draft policy
>           under discussion specifies a?/18 total holdings for
grandfathered orgs, while the current waitlist policy (2019-16) specifies a /20.
>        4. Organizations that were on the waitlist before 2019-16 
> should be
eligible regardless of their total holdings because that was not a
>           restriction of the policy under which they originally 
> qualified
for the waitlist.?
>       ?There was general support to continue finessing this draft. If 
> you
have views on the above noted parameters, please make them known here.
> 
> For reference:
> 
> Old waitlist policy
>  1. Requester specifies smallest block they'd be willing to accept, 
> equal
to or larger than the applicable minimum size specified elsewhere in ARIN
>     policy.
>  2. Did not place a limit on the total existing IP address holdings of 
> a
party eligible for the waitlist.
>  3. Made resources issued from the waitlist ineligible for transfer 
> until after a period of 12 months. New Waitlist Policy  1. Limits the 
> size of block ARIN can issue on the waitlist to a /22.
>  2. Places a limit on the total existing IP address holdings of a 
> party
eligible for the waitlist at a /20 or less.
>  3. Makes resources issued from the waitlist ineligible for transfer 
> until after a period of 60 months.
> 
> Best,
> Alyssa
> 
> On Thu, Mar 26, 2020 at 3:35 PM David Farmer <farmer at umn.edu> wrote:
>       I support this policy and believe the policy development process 
> is
the proper place to handle this issue. However, this policy seems to
>       be implementable?as a one-time policy directive to ARIN Staff. 
> Once
implemented, by putting the effected?organizations?back on the waiting
>       list, it seems unnecessary to memorialized the text in the NRPM, 
> it
would immediately become extraneous and potentially?confusing to
>       future readers of the NRPM.
> Therefore, I would like?to recommend the Policy Statement?not be added 
> to the NRPM upon its implementation. I believe this to be?consistent?
> with
the intent of the policy.? Otherwise, does ARIN Staff have procedural advice on how best to handle what seems like a one-time directive?
> 
> Thanks
> 
> On Tue, Mar 24, 2020 at 12:21 PM ARIN <info at arin.net> wrote:
>
>       Draft Policy ARIN-2020-2: Grandfathering of Organizations 
> Removed
from
>       Waitlist by Implementation of ARIN-2019-16
>
>       Problem Statement:
>
>       The implementation of the ARIN-2019-16 Advisory Council
Recommendation
>       Regarding NRPM 4.1.8: Unmet Requests caused some organizations to be
>       removed from the waiting list that were approved under the old
policy?s
>       eligibility criteria. These organizations should have been
grandfathered
>       when the waitlist was reopened to allow them to receive an
allocation of
>       IPv4 up to the new policy?s maximum size constraint of a /22.
>
>       Policy Statement: Update NRPM Section 4.1.8 as follows:
>
>       Add section 4.1.8.3 (temporary language in the NRPM to remain 
> until
the
>       policy objective is achieved)
>
>       Restoring organizations to the waitlist
>
>       ARIN will restore organizations that were removed from the 
> waitlist
at
>       the adoption of ARIN-2019-16 to their previous position 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.
>
>       Comments:
>
>       Timetable for implementation: Immediate
>
>       Anything Else: While attending ARIN 44 and discussing this with
other
>       community members the vast majority indicated that they agreed 
> that
some
>       organizations were treated unfairly. This proposal is a remedy.
>       _______________________________________________
>       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://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2flists.arin.net%2fmailman%2flistinfo%2farin-ppml&c=E,1,itejYWK1neA4HwQI2654uD6T84LDr-jtyvegBUSRLaqI3i7cGDsXGSLO9kZFAeEqibHLpNp9IQUPINbrQtts-4t2a9DQNRIijWuYbVTpZdvZJI2YmIU7zQMg&typo=1
>       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 
> ===============================================
> _______________________________________________
> 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://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2flists.arin.net%2fm
> ailman%2flistinfo%2farin-ppml&c=E,1,pr8_yOATR6fbNAoiwPjuIuQtJCW1Nm7qlk
> KG7uppvzhqUtK33qz6GCTJCwHGGeKePdcEaJZZdUUw-RTujqMB1FJ2DG6HTd2r6GM5s4Hy
> nLV4b0vI3AnQPQ,,&typo=1 Please contact info at arin.net if you experience 
> any issues.
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2flists.arin.net%2fm
> ailman%2flistinfo%2farin-ppml&c=E,1,RsBXYYW2wGypb0Y4GbeHTbKFC2827Z3jsp
> at1aezQl0yTqcY6d2pTdFdOAraqUCnPZ-okcO1-ObFc2thTsKxGhJ1eTCN_Cv8UpPoW80d
> 6gOeCMy96nbc8z4g0yY0&typo=1 Please contact info at arin.net if you 
> experience any issues.
> 
> 
>

_______________________________________________
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://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2flists.arin.net%2fmailman%2flistinfo%2farin-ppml&c=E,1,PZT3k6xZlfRBghEBxxufd4mu2Ve_KsVjNFFbz6LOCh9lpSIRtyNyDCvryXvevPimoqYvm4gDqykjaXQTjrj8V6QM-AY3-lYKC-1oXXBA-awSsCEN&typo=1
Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.


------------------------------

Subject: Digest Footer

_______________________________________________
ARIN-PPML mailing list
ARIN-PPML at arin.net
https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml


------------------------------

End of ARIN-PPML Digest, Vol 181, Issue 16
******************************************


More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list