[arin-ppml] More explicit handling of policy change transition issues (was: Re: Oppose Draft Policy ARIN-2020-2)

[John Curran]

ARIN Policy Community -

To be clear, number resource issuance under the Waiting List policy was suspended by the ARIN Board of Trustees, and then when it was resumed, continuing issuance of IPv4 was done under the revised policy language that the ARIN AC developed and the Board adopted.  This was all done in accordance with the ARIN Policy Development Process (ARIN PDP.)   I write this note not to advocate for or against the policy change, but rather to make clear that the need to explicitly consider the transition aspects is hopefully unique but quite proper.

Changes to ARIN number resource policies are applied to requests upon approval and implementation, but it is worth noting that the waiting list is a bit unusual as it involves requests that have already been approved and organizations that may have been waiting some time under the belief that they are just awaiting available IPv4 resources for issuance (which is a very reasonable assumption.)

We don’t usually consider whether policy changes have specific transition issues to be considered at the time of policy implementation, but in hindsight it can easily be argued that ARIN-2019-16 would have warranted specific consideration of such transition issues.  (As it’s my responsibility both to facilitate the ARIN Policy Development Process and oversee implementation of adopted policies, I consider myself remiss in not foreseeing the need to consider these transition implications, but that realization doesn’t help much at this point.)

If the transition considerations of ARIN-2019-16 were explicitly considered at that time, one could easily argue that once available those already in the Waiting List should be issued IPv4 resources subject to some, none, or all of the revised requirements, and the outcome of that consideration documented in the recommended policy change.

It is perfectly reasonable for the community to raise the transition issue at this point and seek to have it explicitly considered.  It is for the community to consider what processing is most appropriate of those who were on the waiting list given the "Fair and Impartial” criteria in the ARIN PDP, and then reflect that consideration in a policy change if deemed appropriate.  To be clear, the explicit consideration of the appropriate handling of the pending requests via this policy discussion of ARIN-2020-2 is not setting any bad precedent, but simply documenting the implications of implementing ARIN-2019-16 with more explicit consideration and clarity. I will endeavor to catch any upcoming policy changes that might have unusual transition issues and point such out explicitly so we may avoid the need for these sorts of discussions in the future.

With the above as context, I’d ask that folks continue with the discussion of the merits and concerns with Recommended Draft Policy ARIN-2020-2.

Thanks!
/John

John Curran
President and CEO
American Registry for Internet Numbers





-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20201103/490c7763/attachment.htm>