<html>
  <head>
    <meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
      http-equiv="Content-Type">
  </head>
  <body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
    <div class="moz-cite-prefix">Hi Jason,<br>
      <br>
      On 5/28/2013 9:04 PM, Jason Schiller wrote:<br>
    </div>
    <blockquote
cite="mid:CAC4yj2X5RemO1rMQ35Q-LWBAri4Vim41Y4OuEwaV6BhANq6jyQ@mail.gmail.com"
      type="cite">
      <div dir="ltr">Andrew thanks for your feed back.
        <div><br>
        </div>
        <div style="">I want to point out that much of this language
          comes from either RFC-2050 or the current PDP or NRPM.  I
          tired to change the language as little as possible, except
          where we have commonly agreed on new language such as
          "efficient utilization" instead of conservation.  I thought
          that might be the most uncontroversial starting point.  I am
          not opposed to changing it, especially if it makes the text
          less controversial.</div>
        <div><br>
        </div>
      </div>
    </blockquote>
    I didn't have any of those docs in front of me when reviewing the
    proposal, so I didn't specifically note they were "existing policy
    text." In general, I'm in favor of reusing text where it makes
    sense.  I will say that there probably always is room for
    improvement, and 2050 is now pretty dated so updating the language
    to be more relevant to today's practices & principles is
    probably a step forward.<br>
    <br>
    <blockquote
cite="mid:CAC4yj2X5RemO1rMQ35Q-LWBAri4Vim41Y4OuEwaV6BhANq6jyQ@mail.gmail.com"
      type="cite">
      <div dir="ltr">
        <div>---</div>
        <div><br>
        </div>
        <div>WRT the LIR/ISP I agree, we should adopt whatever we think
          the standard term should be.<br>
          <div><br>
          </div>
          <div>---</div>
          <div><br>
          </div>
          <div style="">WRT using number resources instead of IP address
            space I would have to take a careful look and make sure we
            are not applying principles that make sense with respect IP
            addressing to ASNs if they don't make sense.   It is not
            clear to me if you think these changes should be throughout
            the text, or only in section 0.1. <br>
          </div>
        </div>
      </div>
    </blockquote>
    <br>
    I probably wasn't totally consistent in my initial comments.  Since
    this is "RIR Principles" I believe this policy proposal should refer
    in general to number resources unless the statements directly apply
    only to a subset of Internet number resources.  <br>
    <br>
    <blockquote
cite="mid:CAC4yj2X5RemO1rMQ35Q-LWBAri4Vim41Y4OuEwaV6BhANq6jyQ@mail.gmail.com"
      type="cite">
      <div dir="ltr">
        <div>
          <div class="gmail_extra"><br>
          </div>
          <div class="gmail_extra">---</div>
          <div class="gmail_extra"><br>
            Andrew writes:<br>
            > I think this section [<span style="color:rgb(80,0,80)">0.1.
              Efficient utilization based on need (Conservation)</span>] </div>
          <div class="gmail_extra">> should have an explicit
            reference to the difference</div>
          <div class="gmail_extra">> in conservation techniques for
            IPv4 and IPv6.  A proposed sentence might<br>
            > be something like this... "Conservation goals may vary
            due to the<br>
            > technical differences between IP number resources
            pools, for example the<br>
            > relatively limited size of the IPv4 address pool causes
            a desire to see<br>
            > the number space more highly utilized compared to the
            vast availability<br>
            > of IP numbers within the IPv6 address pool."<br>
            <br>
            I made a conscious effort to keep this text in section 0.4
            for clarity.  </div>
          <div class="gmail_extra"><br>
          </div>
          <div class="gmail_extra" style="">From the draf policy section
            0.4:</div>
          <div class="gmail_extra">"For example, efficient utilization
            becomes a more prominent issue than aggregation as the IPv4
            free pool depletes and IPv4 resource availability in any
            transfer market decreases. Conversely, because the IPv6
            number space is orders of magnitude larger than the IPv4
            number space, the scale tips away from efficient utilization
            towards hierarchical aggregation for IPv6 number resources."</div>
          <div class="gmail_extra"><br>
          </div>
          <div class="gmail_extra" style="">Does that text fulfill your
            suggestion of "Conservation goals may vary due to the
            technical differences between IP number resources pools, for
            example the relatively limited size of the IPv4 address pool
            causes a desire to see the number space more highly utilized
            compared to the vast availability of IP numbers within the
            IPv6 address pool."</div>
          <div class="gmail_extra" style=""><br>
          </div>
          <div class="gmail_extra" style="">Do you have concerns about
            where this text is located?</div>
          <div class="gmail_extra"><br>
          </div>
        </div>
      </div>
    </blockquote>
    <br>
    I realized later that I inserted similar "IPv4 is different that
    IPv6" into multiple sections, since I thought it applied in unique
    ways to each section.  Perhaps for clarity it should only be in
    section 0.4 Stewardship, since this is the section that talks about
    balance between different elements and goals?  I'm also OK with it
    being only in one section, but I would want it to somehow illuminate
    specifically that conservation varies based on number resource. <br>
    <br>
    Perhaps just add the statement w/o example?  "Conservation goals may
    vary due to the technical differences between IP number resources
    pools." <br>
    <br>
    Not a showstopper for me, if it isn't in 0.1.<br>
    <br>
    Building on Bill's comments in his notes, I think there might be
    room toward using the term sustainability in these principles.  That
    term is well known in "corporate speak" and might be closer to the
    RIR's goals & principles compared with other words.  <br>
    <br>
    <blockquote
cite="mid:CAC4yj2X5RemO1rMQ35Q-LWBAri4Vim41Y4OuEwaV6BhANq6jyQ@mail.gmail.com"
      type="cite">
      <div dir="ltr">
        <div>
          <div class="gmail_extra">---</div>
          <div class="gmail_extra">
            <br>
          </div>
          <div class="gmail_extra" style="">Andrew writes:<br>
          </div>
          <div class="gmail_extra" style=""><span
              style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px">>
              "Utilization rate of address space will be an important
              factor in</span><br
              style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px">
            <span
              style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px">>
              justifying need for IP number resources.  However,
              utilization rates</span><br
              style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px">
            <span
              style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px">>
              will vary due to the technical differences (e.g. IPv4 vs.
              IPv6) between</span><br
              style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px">
            <span
              style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px">>
              number resource pools."</span><br
              style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px">
          </div>
          <div><span
              style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px"><br>
            </span></div>
          <div style=""><span
              style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px">Again,
              I made </span>a conscious effort to keep this text in
            section 0.4 for clarity, and would quote the same text.</div>
          <div style="">
            <br>
          </div>
          <div style="">Does that meet your concern about your proposed
            text?</div>
          <div style=""><br>
          </div>
          <div style="">
            <div class="gmail_extra">Do you have concerns about where
              this text is located?</div>
          </div>
        </div>
      </div>
    </blockquote>
    <br>
    Perhaps just keeping it all in 0.4 is best.<br>
    <br>
    <blockquote
cite="mid:CAC4yj2X5RemO1rMQ35Q-LWBAri4Vim41Y4OuEwaV6BhANq6jyQ@mail.gmail.com"
      type="cite">
      <div dir="ltr">
        <div>
          <div style="">
            <div><br>
            </div>
            <div style="">
              Should I repeat the paragraph in 0.1, 0.1.1, and 0.4?</div>
          </div>
          <div class="gmail_extra" style=""><br>
          </div>
        </div>
      </div>
    </blockquote>
    I wouldn't repeat the paragraph.<br>
    <br>
    <blockquote
cite="mid:CAC4yj2X5RemO1rMQ35Q-LWBAri4Vim41Y4OuEwaV6BhANq6jyQ@mail.gmail.com"
      type="cite">
      <div dir="ltr">
        <div>
          <div class="gmail_extra" style="">---</div>
          <div class="gmail_extra" style="">Andrew writes:</div>
          <div class="gmail_extra" style="">
            <div class="im"
              style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px">>>
              In order to promote increased usage of Internet number
              resources,<br>
              >> resource holders will be required to provide an
              accounting of<br>
              >> resources currently held demonstrating efficient
              utilization. Internet<br>
              >> number resources are valid as long as the
              criteria continues to be<br>
              >> met. The transfer of Internet number resources
              from one party to<br>
              >> another must be approved by the regional
              registries. The party trying<br>
              >> to obtain the resources must meet the same
              criteria as if they were<br>
              >> requesting resources directly from the IR.<br>
              >><br>
              >> All Internet number resource requests are subject
              to audit and<br>
              >> verification by any means deemed appropriate by
              the regional registry.<br>
              >><br>
              ></div>
            <span
              style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px">>
              I suspect the above two paragraphs may be lightning rods
              against the</span><br
              style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px">
            <span
              style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px">>
              policy proposal.   May I suggest the following single
              paragraph in lieu</span><br
              style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px">
            <span
              style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px">>
              of the above two paragraphs.</span><br
              style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px">
            ><br
              style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px">
            <span
              style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px">>
              In order meet the Principles and Goals of the Internet
              Registry System,</span><br
              style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px">
            <span
              style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px">>
              resource holders may be required from time to time to
              provide an</span><br
              style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px">
            <span
              style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px">>
              accounting and current usage of resources currently held.
               The RIRs</span><br
              style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px">
            <span
              style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px">>
              shall set policies to define these accounting mythologies
              as part of</span><br
              style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px">
            <span
              style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px">>
              their community driven policy process.</span><br
              style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px">
          </div>
          <div><span
              style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px"><br>
            </span></div>
          <div style=""><span
              style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px">I'm
              not sure why you think these two paragraphs are lightening
              rods.</span></div>
          <div style=""><span
              style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px"><br>
            </span></div>
          <div style=""><span
              style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px">RFC-2050
              3.3 says:</span></div>
          <div style=""><span
              style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px">"</span><span
              style="color:rgb(0,0,0);white-space:pre-wrap">T</span>o
            promote increased usage of address space, the registries
            will<br>
              require an accounting of address space previously assigned
            to the<br>
              enterprise, if any."</div>
        </div>
      </div>
    </blockquote>
    <br>
    I believe including text that says orgs must keep records of how the
    use address space is totally appropriate.  Record keeping doesn't
    necessarily "proposed increased usage" but does provide
    accountability and transparency which I believe should be one of the
    goals of the registry system.<br>
    <br>
    <blockquote
cite="mid:CAC4yj2X5RemO1rMQ35Q-LWBAri4Vim41Y4OuEwaV6BhANq6jyQ@mail.gmail.com"
      type="cite">
      <div dir="ltr">
        <div>
          <div style=""><span
              style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px"><br>
            </span></div>
          RFC-2050 3.1 says:<br>
          <br>
          "IP addresses are valid as long as the criteria continues to
          be met."</div>
      </div>
    </blockquote>
    <br>
    One might construe this statement to directly invalidate existing
    legacy allocations which would now be in ARIN's policy through this
    policy.  Others might be worried that this opens the door wider to
    changing policy to retroactively revoke allocations or assignments
    by changing "criteria".   Furthermore, I believe this idea is
    already handled by existing NRPM text and the RSA.<br>
    <br>
    <blockquote
cite="mid:CAC4yj2X5RemO1rMQ35Q-LWBAri4Vim41Y4OuEwaV6BhANq6jyQ@mail.gmail.com"
      type="cite">
      <div dir="ltr">
        <div>
          <div style="">
            <pre style="word-wrap:break-word"><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px;white-space:pre-wrap">RFC-2050 4.7 says</span>


</pre>
          </div>
          <div style=""><span
              style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px">"</span><span
              style="color:rgb(0,0,0);white-space:pre-wrap">The transfer
              of I</span>P addresses from one party to another must be<br>
              approved by the regional registries.  The party trying to
            obtain<br>
              the IP address must meet the same criteria as if they were<br>
              requesting an IP address directly from the IR."</div>
          <div><br>
          </div>
        </div>
      </div>
    </blockquote>
    I believe this "policy" element is best handled in the details
    section of the NRPM rather than the principles section.  ARIN's
    policies already define transfers.  Having a generic "RIRs shall
    determine IP number resources transfer policies through their
    community drive policy development process." might be a good
    addition to this proposal.<br>
    <br>
    <blockquote
cite="mid:CAC4yj2X5RemO1rMQ35Q-LWBAri4Vim41Y4OuEwaV6BhANq6jyQ@mail.gmail.com"
      type="cite">
      <div dir="ltr">
        <div>
          <div style="">
            RFC-2050 4.4 says:</div>
          "All IP address requests are subject to audit and verification<br>
            by any means deemed appropriate by the regional registry."<br>
          <br>
        </div>
      </div>
    </blockquote>
    I just remember for multiple years discussing policy 2007-14 &
    others when we put into policy existing auditing and review
    practices.  Since ARIN's policies and RSA already talk about audit
    procedures, I also thought this was not necessary.  The language "by
    any means deemed appropriate by the regional registry" is a wide
    open door that many I believe won't like.  By using text to say
    auditing is done by the community through adopted policy you limit
    an RIR's auditing to specifically what the community wants the
    registry to do.<br>
    <br>
    <blockquote
cite="mid:CAC4yj2X5RemO1rMQ35Q-LWBAri4Vim41Y4OuEwaV6BhANq6jyQ@mail.gmail.com"
      type="cite">
      <div dir="ltr">
        <div>And there is lots of text about conservation in RFC-2050
          and </div>
        <div>efficient utilization in the NRPM.
          <div><span
              style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px"><br>
            </span></div>
          <div style=""><span
              style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px">Can
              you elaborate on the lightening rod potin?</span></div>
          <div style=""><span
              style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px"><br>
            </span></div>
        </div>
      </div>
    </blockquote>
    See above comments.<br>
    <blockquote
cite="mid:CAC4yj2X5RemO1rMQ35Q-LWBAri4Vim41Y4OuEwaV6BhANq6jyQ@mail.gmail.com"
      type="cite">
      <div dir="ltr">
        <div>
          <div style=""><span
              style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px">I
              can only guess you are suggesting that the community wants</span></div>
          <div style=""><span
              style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px">to
              depart from the principles in RFC-2050, but think you must</span></div>
          <div style=""><span
              style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px">mean
              something else.</span></div>
          <div style=""><span
              style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px"><br>
            </span></div>
          <div style=""><span
              style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px">What
              am I missing here?</span></div>
          <br>
        </div>
      </div>
    </blockquote>
    <br>
    Hopefully my comments above illuminate the concerns I had about the
    text.  Basically it comes down to "modernizing" the 2050
    text/principles, and keeping principles in the principles section
    and not putting specific policy in the principles section.<br>
    <br>
    <blockquote
cite="mid:CAC4yj2X5RemO1rMQ35Q-LWBAri4Vim41Y4OuEwaV6BhANq6jyQ@mail.gmail.com"
      type="cite">
      <div dir="ltr">
        <div>
          <div class="gmail_extra" style=""><br>
          </div>
          <div class="gmail_extra" style="">Andrew writes:</div>
          <div class="gmail_extra" style="">
            <div class="im"
              style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px">>>
              0.2. Hierarchical aggregation (Routability)<br>
              >><br>
              >> Policies for managing Internet number resources
              must support<br>
              >> distribution of globally unique Internet
              addresses in a hierarchical<br>
              >> manner, permitting the routing scalability of the
              addresses. </div>
            <div class="im"
              style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px">
              ></div>
            <span
              style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px">>
              Should the RIR's goals be "LISP agnostic"?  That is if
              LISP becomes the</span><br
              style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px">
            <span
              style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px">>
              predominant routing methodology in the future, one would
              not necessarily</span><br
              style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px">
            <span
              style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px">>
              expect the goals of the RIRs to change.</span><br
              style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px">
            ><br
              style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px">
            <span
              style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px">>
              Suggested change to end of first sentence.</span><br
              style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px">
            ><br
              style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px">
            <span
              style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px">>
              ... permitting the routing scalability of the addresses as
              required by</span><br
              style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px">
            <span
              style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px">>
              the current technical limitations of global routing
              protocols.</span><br
              style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px">
          </div>
          <div><span
              style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px"><br>
            </span></div>
          <div style=""><span
              style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px">I
              think this change is good even w/o considering LISP.</span></div>
          <div style=""><span
              style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px">Imagine
              we have new holographic memory that can hold orders of </span></div>
          <div style=""><span
              style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px">magnitude
              more data and decrease read time</span></div>
          <div><span
              style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px"><br>
            </span></div>
          <div><span
              style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px">---</span></div>
          <div style=""><span
              style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px"><br>
            </span></div>
          <div style=""><span
              style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px">Andrew
              writes:</span></div>
          <div style=""><span
              style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px">></span></div>
          <div>
            <div class="im"
              style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px">>>
              0.3. Uniqueness (Registration)<br>
              >><br>
              >> c) to ensure that a provider has exhausted a
              majority of<br>
              >> its current CIDR allocation, thereby justifying
              an additional<br>
              >> allocation d) to assist in IP allocation studies.<br>
              ></div>
            <span
              style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px">>
              Suggested revision for "C"</span><br
              style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px">
            ><br
              style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px">
            <span
              style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px">>
              to allow a LIR to demonstrate and disclose reassignment of
              IP number</span><br
              style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px">
            <span
              style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px">>
              resources to third-parties</span><br
              style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px">
          </div>
          <div><span
              style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px"><br>
            </span></div>
          <div style=""><font face="arial, sans-serif">I think the point
              is to demonstrate reassignment data to
              demonstrate efficient utilization.  </font></div>
          <div style=""><font face="arial, sans-serif">But I also think
              that point is covered in section 0.1.1, So the rewrite
              here is ok.</font></div>
          <div><span
              style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px"><br>
            </span></div>
          <div><span
              style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px">---</span></div>
          <div><span
              style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px"><br>
            </span></div>
          <div style=""><span
              style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px">Andrew
              writes:</span></div>
          <div style=""><span
              style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px">>
              Perhaps add a statement specifically about Stewardship</span><br
style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px">
            ><br
              style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px">
            <span
              style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px">>
              "Stewardship of IP number resources is the balance of
              overseeing and</span><br
              style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px">
            <span
              style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px">>
              protecting the interests of all Internet stakeholders to
              further the</span><br
              style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px">
            <span
              style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px">>
              development and expansion of the Internet and the Internet
              Registry System."</span><br
              style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px">
            <br>
            I do not oppose this text.</div>
          <div style=""><br
              style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px">
            <span
              style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px">Andrew
              also writes...</span><br
              style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px">
            ><br
              style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px">
            <span
              style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px">>
              justified need as a conflicting goal should be explicitly
              mentioned.</span><br
              style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px">
            ><br
              style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px">
            <span
              style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px">>
              "It should be noted that efficient utilization, justified
              need, and</span><br
              style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px">
            <div class="im"
              style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px">>hierarchical
              aggregation are often conflicting goals."<br>
            </div>
            <div class="im"
              style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px">
              <br>
            </div>
            <div class="im"
              style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px">I'm
              not sure this parses correctly...  This sounds to me like
              there are </div>
            <div class="im"
              style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px">
              conflicts between all three:</div>
            <div class="im"
              style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px"><br>
            </div>
            <div class="im"><font face="arial, sans-serif">efficient utilization
                vs justified need vs hierarchical aggregation.  </font></div>
            <div class="im"
              style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px"><br>
            </div>
            <div class="im"
              style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px">How
              about:</div>
            <div class="im"
              style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px">
              <span style="color:rgb(34,34,34)">"It should be noted that
                efficient utilization based on justified need, and</span><br
                style="color:rgb(34,34,34)">
              <div class="im">hierarchical aggregation are often
                conflicting goals."<br>
              </div>
              <div><br>
              </div>
            </div>
            <div class="im"
              style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px"><br>
            </div>
            <div class="im"
              style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px"><br>
            </div>
          </div>
          <div><span
              style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px">-</span></div>
          <div class="gmail_extra" style=""><br>
          </div>
          <div class="gmail_extra"><br>
          </div>
          <div class="gmail_extra">
            <div class="gmail_quote">On Tue, May 28, 2013 at 2:19 PM,
              Andrew Dul <span dir="ltr"><<a moz-do-not-send="true"
                  href="mailto:andrew.dul@quark.net" target="_blank">andrew.dul@quark.net</a>></span>
              wrote:<br>
              <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px
0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex">I
                support adding these guiding principles to the NRPM,
                furthermore I<br>
                would support efforts to introduce this policy in all
                RIR regions to<br>
                make this a global policy.<br>
                <br>
                Comments on the proposed text in-line below.<br>
                <br>
                Andrew<br>
                <div class="im"><br>
                  On 5/17/2013 9:53 AM, ARIN wrote:<br>
                  > Draft Policy ARIN-2013-4<br>
                  > RIR Principles<br>
                  ><br>
                  > On 16 May 2013 the ARIN Advisory Council (AC)
                  accepted "ARIN-prop-187<br>
                  > RIR Principles" as a Draft Policy.<br>
                  ><br>
                  > Draft Policy ARIN-2013-4 is below and can be
                  found at:<br>
                  > <a moz-do-not-send="true"
                    href="https://www.arin.net/policy/proposals/2013_4.html"
                    target="_blank">https://www.arin.net/policy/proposals/2013_4.html</a><br>
                  ><br>
                  ><br>
                </div>
                <div>
                  <div class="h5">> ## * ##<br>
                    ><br>
                    ><br>
                    > Draft Policy ARIN-2013-4<br>
                    > RIR Principles<br>
                    ><br>
                    > Date: 17 May 2013<br>
                    ><br>
                    > Problem Statement:<br>
                    ><br>
                    > The original text in RFC 2050 both "describes
                    the registry system for<br>
                    > the distribution of globally unique Internet
                    address space and<br>
                    > registry operations" and provides "rules and
                    guidelines [principles]<br>
                    > governing the distribution of this address
                    space."<br>
                    ><br>
                    > The currently proposed update (RFC2050bis)
                    "provides information about<br>
                    > the current Internet Numbers Registry System
                    used in the distribution<br>
                    > of globally unique Internet Protocol (IP)
                    address space and autonomous<br>
                    > system (AS) numbers" and "provides information
                    about the processes for<br>
                    > further evolution of the Internet Numbers
                    Registry System."<br>
                    ><br>
                    > This means that the guiding principles of
                    stewardship are not<br>
                    > currently being carried forward into the new
                    document. The goals of<br>
                    > Conservation (efficient utilization based on
                    need), Routability<br>
                    > (hierarchical aggregation), and Registration
                    (uniqueness) are as<br>
                    > important, if not more so, now that the
                    transition to IPv6 is upon us.<br>
                    > This can be rectified by documenting these
                    principles in RIR policy.<br>
                    ><br>
                    > Policy Statement:<br>
                    ><br>
                    > Section 0: Principles and Goals of the Internet
                    Registry System<br>
                    ><br>
                    > 0.1. Efficient utilization based on need
                    (Conservation)<br>
                    ><br>
                    > Policies for managing Internet number resources
                    must support fair<br>
                    > distribution of globally unique Internet
                    address space according to<br>
                    > the operational needs of the end-users and
                    Internet Service Providers<br>
                    > operating networks using this address space.
                    The registry should<br>
                    > prevent stockpiling in order to maximize the
                    conservation and<br>
                    > efficient utilization of the Internet address
                    space.<br>
                    <br>
                  </div>
                </div>
                This section should use the new proposed convention of
                "LIR/ISP" as<br>
                being developed in ARIN-2013-5.<br>
                <br>
                s/this address space/IP number resources/r<br>
                s/Internet address space/IP number resources/r<br>
                <br>
                I think this section should have an explicit reference
                to the difference<br>
                in conservation techniques for IPv4 and IPv6.  A
                proposed sentence might<br>
                be something like this... "Conservation goals may vary
                due to the<br>
                technical differences between IP number resources pools,
                for example the<br>
                relatively limited size of the IPv4 address pool causes
                a desire to see<br>
                the number space more highly utilized compared to the
                vast availability<br>
                of IP numbers within the IPv6 address pool."<br>
                <div class="im"><br>
                  ><br>
                  > 0.1.1. Documented Justified Need (Needs Based)<br>
                  ><br>
                  > Assignment of Internet number resources is based
                  on documented<br>
                  > operational need. Utilization rate of address
                  space will be a key<br>
                  > factor in number resource assignment. To this
                  end, registrants should<br>
                  > have documented justified need available for each
                  assignment.<br>
                  > Organizations will be assigned resources based on
                  immediate<br>
                  > utilization plus expected utilization.<br>
                  <br>
                </div>
                Utilization rate is much more important for IPv4 than
                IPv6.<br>
                <br>
                Suggested revision for "Utilization rate of address
                space will be a key<br>
                <div class="im">factor in number resource assignment."<br>
                  <br>
                </div>
                "Utilization rate of address space will be an important
                factor in<br>
                justifying need for IP number resources.  However,
                utilization rates<br>
                will vary due to the technical differences (e.g. IPv4
                vs. IPv6) between<br>
                number resource pools."<br>
                <div class="im"><br>
                  ><br>
                  > In order to promote increased usage of Internet
                  number resources,<br>
                  > resource holders will be required to provide an
                  accounting of<br>
                  > resources currently held demonstrating efficient
                  utilization. Internet<br>
                  > number resources are valid as long as the
                  criteria continues to be<br>
                  > met. The transfer of Internet number resources
                  from one party to<br>
                  > another must be approved by the regional
                  registries. The party trying<br>
                  > to obtain the resources must meet the same
                  criteria as if they were<br>
                  > requesting resources directly from the IR.<br>
                  ><br>
                  > All Internet number resource requests are subject
                  to audit and<br>
                  > verification by any means deemed appropriate by
                  the regional registry.<br>
                  ><br>
                  <br>
                </div>
                I suspect the above two paragraphs may be lightning rods
                against the<br>
                policy proposal.   May I suggest the following single
                paragraph in lieu<br>
                of the above two paragraphs.<br>
                <br>
                In order meet the Principles and Goals of the Internet
                Registry System,<br>
                resource holders may be required from time to time to
                provide an<br>
                accounting and current usage of resources currently
                held.  The RIRs<br>
                shall set policies to define these accounting
                mythologies as part of<br>
                their community driven policy process.<br>
                <div class="im"><br>
                  <br>
                  > 0.2. Hierarchical aggregation (Routability)<br>
                  ><br>
                  > Policies for managing Internet number resources
                  must support<br>
                  > distribution of globally unique Internet
                  addresses in a hierarchical<br>
                  > manner, permitting the routing scalability of the
                  addresses. This<br>
                  > scalability is necessary to ensure proper
                  operation of Internet<br>
                  > routing, although it must be stressed that
                  routability is in no way<br>
                  > guaranteed with the allocation or assignment of
                  IPv4 addresses.<br>
                  ><br>
                  <br>
                </div>
                Should the RIR's goals be "LISP agnostic"?  That is if
                LISP becomes the<br>
                predominant routing methodology in the future, one would
                not necessarily<br>
                expect the goals of the RIRs to change.<br>
                <br>
                Suggested change to end of first sentence.<br>
                <br>
                ... permitting the routing scalability of the addresses
                as required by<br>
                the current technical limitations of global routing
                protocols.<br>
                <div class="im"><br>
                  > 0.3. Uniqueness (Registration)<br>
                  ><br>
                  > Provision of a public registry documenting
                  Internet number resource<br>
                  > allocation, reallocation, assignment, and
                  reassignment is necessary to:<br>
                  ><br>
                  > a) ensure uniqueness and to to provide
                  operational staff with<br>
                  > information on who is using the number resource
                  b) to provide a<br>
                  > contact in case of operational/security problems
                  (e.g. Law<br>
                  > Enforcement) c) to ensure that a provider has
                  exhausted a majority of<br>
                  > its current CIDR allocation, thereby justifying
                  an additional<br>
                  > allocation d) to assist in IP allocation studies.<br>
                  <br>
                </div>
                Suggested revision for "C"<br>
                <br>
                to allow a LIR to demonstrate and disclose reassignment
                of IP number<br>
                resources to third-parties<br>
                <div class="im"><br>
                  ><br>
                  > It is imperative that reassignment information be
                  submitted in a<br>
                  > prompt and efficient manner to facilitate
                  database maintenance and<br>
                  > ensure database integrity.<br>
                  ><br>
                  > 0.4. Stewardship<br>
                  ><br>
                  > It should be noted that efficient utilization and
                  hierarchical<br>
                  > aggregation are often conflicting goals. All the
                  above goals may<br>
                  > sometimes be in conflict with the interests of
                  individual end-users or<br>
                  > Internet Service Providers. Care must be taken to
                  ensure balance with<br>
                  > these conflicting goals given the resource
                  availability, relative size<br>
                  > of the resource, and number resource specific
                  technical dynamics, for<br>
                  > each type of number resource. For example,
                  efficient utilization<br>
                  > becomes a more prominent issue than aggregation
                  as the IPv4 free pool<br>
                  > depletes and IPv4 resource availability in any
                  transfer market<br>
                  > decreases. Conversely, because the IPv6 number
                  space is orders of<br>
                  > magnitude larger than the IPv4 number space, the
                  scale tips away from<br>
                  > efficient utilization towards hierarchical
                  aggregation for IPv6 number<br>
                  > resources.<br>
                  <br>
                </div>
                Perhaps add a statement specifically about Stewardship<br>
                <br>
                "Stewardship of IP number resources is the balance of
                overseeing and<br>
                protecting the interests of all Internet stakeholders to
                further the<br>
                development and expansion of the Internet and the
                Internet Registry System."<br>
                <br>
                Also...<br>
                <br>
                justified need as a conflicting goal should be
                explicitly mentioned.<br>
                <br>
                "It should be noted that efficient utilization,
                justified need, and<br>
                <div class="im">hierarchical aggregation are often
                  conflicting goals."<br>
                  <br>
                </div>
                Use the new LIR/ISP convention instead of "Internet
                Service Providers"<br>
                <div class="">
                  <div class="h5"><br>
                    <br>
                    <br>
                    ><br>
                    > Comments:<br>
                    ><br>
                    > a. Timetable for implementation: immediately<br>
                    ><br>
                    > b. I believe that it would be beneficial for
                    IANA to adopt these<br>
                    > principles as well, and encourage the community
                    to consider a global<br>
                    > policy proposal.<br>
                    > _______________________________________________<br>
                    > PPML<br>
                    > You are receiving this message because you are
                    subscribed to<br>
                    > the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (<a
                      moz-do-not-send="true"
                      href="mailto:ARIN-PPML@arin.net">ARIN-PPML@arin.net</a>).<br>
                    > Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list
                    subscription at:<br>
                    > <a moz-do-not-send="true"
                      href="http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml"
                      target="_blank">http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml</a><br>
                    > Please contact <a moz-do-not-send="true"
                      href="mailto:info@arin.net">info@arin.net</a> if
                    you experience any issues.<br>
                    <br>
                    _______________________________________________<br>
                    PPML<br>
                    You are receiving this message because you are
                    subscribed to<br>
                    the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (<a
                      moz-do-not-send="true"
                      href="mailto:ARIN-PPML@arin.net">ARIN-PPML@arin.net</a>).<br>
                    Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription
                    at:<br>
                    <a moz-do-not-send="true"
                      href="http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml"
                      target="_blank">http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml</a><br>
                    Please contact <a moz-do-not-send="true"
                      href="mailto:info@arin.net">info@arin.net</a> if
                    you experience any issues.<br>
                  </div>
                </div>
              </blockquote>
            </div>
            <br>
            <br clear="all">
            <div><br>
            </div>
            -- <br>
            <font color="#555555" face="'courier new', monospace">
              <div><span style="color:rgb(0,0,0);font-family:arial"><font
                    color="#555555" face="'courier new', monospace">_______________________________________________________<br>
                  </font>
                  <div><font face="'courier new', monospace">Jason
                      Schiller|NetOps|<a moz-do-not-send="true"
                        href="mailto:jschiller@google.com"
                        target="_blank">jschiller@google.com</a>|571-266-0006</font></div>
                  <div><font face="'courier new', monospace"><br>
                    </font></div>
                </span></div>
            </font>
          </div>
        </div>
      </div>
    </blockquote>
    <br>
  </body>
</html>