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

[Chris Woodfield]

Hello all:

The ARIN AC is seeking feedback on the current version of Draft Policy ARIN-2024-5, Rewrite of NRPM Section 4.4. Micro-Allocation.

As of the last Public Policy and Consultation meeting, there was a show of hands in the room that suggested that the ARIN AC should not continue work on this policy proposal. However, there were comments that suggested support for the policy’s goals, but took issue with several of the items in the proposed rewrite.

From those who supported continued work on this, the following changes were suggested, per my notes and recollection:

1. Restore the word “public” to the description of IXPs - currently referred to as “Internet Exchange Points”; suggest modification to “Public Internet Exchange Points” to clarify that IXPs must be publicly accessible to qualify for resources under this policy section.

2. The term “ICANN-sanctioned root and ccTLD operators” and “authorized gTLDs” should be changed to “ICANN-recognized” and “recognized gTLDs" to better reflect the relationship with ICANN to these operators.

3. Clarify that IXP operators that require separation of operational resources (for example: the IXP’s website, monitoring/management portal, et al) from the IXP fabric itself may qualify for an allocation larger than /24 (presumably using Section 4.2.2, Initial Allocation to ISPS, as the qualifying criteria).*

3. Inclusion of public NTP servers in the definition of Critical Internet Infrastructure.**

Given the above, do you still support (or not support) continued work on this policy proposal? If so, would you support or not support the modifications to the current proposal text listed above?

Thank you,

-Chris Woodfield
 ARIN AC

* There is nothing in current text that limits the initial IXP allocation to a single /24 - only that a 24-month supply of resources may be requested - but the qualification criteria for an initial allocation of a /24 is not addressed.
** My personal opinion on this would be to spin this into its own separate proposal, as NTP services are not noted in the problem statement and qualifying criteria would definitely be its own... conversation.