[arin-ppml] Request for Comment & Feedback: Draft Policy ARIN-2025-3: Change Section 9 Out Of Region Use Minimum Criteria

[Eric C. Landgraf]

On Mar 18 18:21, Douglas Camin wrote:
> Eric, you made this as a suggestion at the mic at ARIN56 as well
> (adding language that stated most space had to be used in region.)
> 
> As the shepherd at the time with Gerry, we heard your suggestion and
> evaluated its viability to add to the policy but found it to have too
> many significant secondary implications. Tom’s response accurately
> captures the same understanding we came to.

Thanks for the follow-up. It slipped my mind that I made this
suggestion previously, but the arguements as to why we *can't* do it
make sense.

If it's infeasible to constrain out-of-region use as a ratio of
in-region use, do we really get anything from having this minimum today?
ARIN still requires demonstration of a "real and substantail connection"
to the region at the time of a request for out-of-region use. If an
organization can demonstrate that to ARIN's satisfaction, let them have
resources: IPv6 isn't scarce, and IPv4 is exhausted, so all that the
minimum requirements do is send business elsewhere.

Striking the minima in section 9 allows us to clear up the word salad of
"using the same type of resources (with a delegation lineage back to an
ARIN allocation or assignment) within the ARIN service region", which I
interpret as requiring that one must use ARIN resources within the ARIN
region to qualify, whether those are LIR reassignments or direct. And of
course requires that resources be of the same type: if you need v4 for
out-of-region use, you'd better be using v4 in-region, regardless of
IPv6 deployment.

	Eric C. Landgraf
	Virginia Tech