[arin-ppml] Revised - Draft Policy ARIN-2024-5: Rewrite of NRPM Section 4.4 Micro-Allocation

[Martin Hannigan]

On Tue, Mar 18, 2025 at 3:59 PM John Santos <john at egh.com> wrote:

> Maybe I'm just being persnickety, but is "Use of this policy for CII is
> voluntary." unambiguous?  To me, it means a user can implement CII using
> any
> addresses that are allocated to them, i.e. they are not required to apply
> for
> and use 4.4 space for CII, *BUT* might someone argue that this clause
> means that
> if they have 4.4 space, or acquire it somehow, then using it for CII is
> voluntary and they can use it for anything they want?  Should we add an
> explicit
> provision that 4.4 space may *ONLY* be used for CII?
>

I would suggest we amend this to say something along the lines of
"Requesting number resources from ARIN using this policy is voluntary". The
value of it is ensuring there is no mistake that if an individual or entity
wants to use addresses they already have or prefer to acquire they're more
than welcome to.

If you read the staff review:

https://www.arin.net/participate/policy/drafts/2024_5/

I agree with their recommended changes and believe this addresses your
point with respect to what they should be continuously used for.


>
> Also, does section 4.4.2 create a chicken and egg problem: A TLD operator
> must
> be "a currently active zone operator" to apply for 4.4 space, but they
> can't
> become an active zone operator until they have acquired the IP addresses
> to do
> so?  It would complicate the situation if we added "or plans to become one
> within <reasonable time period>", and another sentence that the allocation
> would
> be subject to revocation if they did not do so.
>
> Or is this just too pedantic to worry about?
>

I would say it's important to be clear. Perhaps clarifying "CII includes
Internet Exchanges, IANA-authorized root servers, TLD operators that offer
domain-level DNS services to outside parties, ARIN, and IANA." to read "CII
includes Internet Exchange Points, IANA-authorized root and TLD operators,
ARIN, and IANA." I'm not certain about how to approach the interplay
between PTI and IANA, but that's probably worth getting correct so policy
is transportable in the even IANA 'transports'.

There's been no explanation about what this means:: "TLD operators that
offer domain-level DNS services to outside parties, ARIN, and IANA" and
opposed to removing the validation requirements (abuse, fraud) and Internet
Exchange vs. Internet Exchange Points. Without the explicit cover of the
community asking ARIN to ensure an IXP can "prove" they are operating in
the region and on an actual piece of hardware consistent with operating an
IXP that networks physically peer across, I would almost see no point in
changing 4.4 at all.

For the TLD operator language, I think what someone is trying to say is
"TLD operators that offer third party DNS infrastructure, ARIN, and IANA".
But others who know more about DNS than me can carry that water.

Warm regards,

-M<
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20250320/910c9ba1/attachment.htm>