<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">Jason, further comments inline.<br>
      <br>
      On 5/30/2013 10:18 PM, Jason Schiller wrote:<br>
    </div>
    <blockquote
cite="mid:CAC4yj2XMe-kecYXb5_t48VdtmhVVjDkpaM0tEjyh2O8SH8c8zA@mail.gmail.com"
      type="cite">
      <div dir="ltr">
        <div>Andrew,</div>
        <div><br>
        </div>
        (Putting aside the RFC-2050 3.1 - does this create a new ability
        to revoke legacy IPs for the other thread)
        <div><br>
        </div>
        <div>Your comments boil down to:</div>
        <div><br>
        </div>
        <div>1. <span
            style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px">it

            comes down to "modernizing" the 2050 text/principles</span></div>
        <div><span
            style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px">2.

            keeping principles in the principles section and not putting
            specific policy in the principles section.</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">In

            general I agree with both.</span></div>
        <div style=""><font face="arial, sans-serif"><br>
          </font></div>
        <div style=""><font face="arial, sans-serif">I tried to start
            with 2050 text/principles, and only attempted to go beyond
            that text where it helped,</font></div>
        <div style=""> <font face="arial, sans-serif">e.g. such
            as substituting "efficient use" for conservation (nobody
            uses conservation) but still paying </font></div>
        <div style=""><font face="arial, sans-serif">homage </font><span
            style="font-family:arial,sans-serif">to the conservation
            section that this principle</span><span
            style="font-family:arial,sans-serif"> stems from.</span></div>
        <div style=""><font face="arial, sans-serif"><br>
          </font></div>
        <div style=""><font face="arial, sans-serif">It is possible that
            some of the language from 2050 is to detailed or "policy
            specific" and should be </font></div>
        <div style=""><font face="arial, sans-serif">stripped away </font><span
            style="font-family:arial,sans-serif">and moved into other
            more relevant sections of the NRPM.  This may be a bit
            tricky to </span></div>
        <div style=""><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif">do
            in separate</span><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif"> proposals

            as you want both things to happen.  </span></div>
        <div style=""><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif"><br>
          </span></div>
        <div style=""><font face="arial, sans-serif">I propose we
            ether initially adopt, then decide if certain details should
            be moved elsewhere, or </font></div>
        <div style=""><font face="arial, sans-serif">figure out which
            specific details should be moved where,and include them in
            this proposal (or both).</font></div>
        <div style=""><font face="arial, sans-serif"><br>
          </font></div>
        <div style=""> <font face="arial, sans-serif">But just because
            there already is a detailed section on say transfers,
            doesn't mean it shouldn't also </font></div>
        <div style=""><font face="arial, sans-serif">be included in the
            principles section that</font></div>
        <div style=""><font face="arial, sans-serif"><br>
          </font></div>
        <div style=""><font face="arial, sans-serif">"</font><span
            style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px">The

            transfer of Internet number resources from one party to
            another must be approved by the regional </span></div>
        <div style=""><span
            style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px"> 
            registries. The party trying to obtain the resources must
            meet the same criteria as if they were </span></div>
        <div style=""><span
            style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px"> 
            requesting resources directly from the IR."</span></div>
      </div>
    </blockquote>
    <br>
    I think having a transfers section in the principles, document is
    appropriate, I would point out that today the transfer policies are
    different from the direct RIR policies, e.g. 24months vs. 3 months. 
    So today we don't follow the above principle.<br>
    <br>
    I'd propose the following updated text:<br>
    <br>
    <big><big><tt><span style="font-size: 13.3333px;">The transfer of
            Internet number resources from one organization to another
            must be approved by a RIR.  Transfer policies are created by
            Internet stakeholders through the community driven policy
            development process.</span></tt><tt><span style="font-size:
            13.3333px;"></span></tt></big></big><br>
     <br>
    <blockquote
cite="mid:CAC4yj2XMe-kecYXb5_t48VdtmhVVjDkpaM0tEjyh2O8SH8c8zA@mail.gmail.com"
      type="cite">
      <div dir="ltr">
        <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">One

            could image that the ARIN community decides that there
            should be no transfers, and all </span></div>
        <div style=""><font face="arial, sans-serif">redistribution</font><span
style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px"> of
            addresses should be through return to IANA and split equally
            among the RIRs.</span></div>
        <div style=""><font face="arial, sans-serif">In this case the
            ARIN community could abolish the text on transfers.
             Would we then loose the</font></div>
        <div style=""><span
            style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px">principle

            that if a transfer was to happen (say a new transfer policy
            in the future) it should be</span></div>
        <div style=""><span
            style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px">governed

            by the same principles of getting address space directly
            from the RIRs?   </span></div>
        <div style=""><font face="arial, sans-serif"><br>
          </font></div>
        <div style=""><font face="arial, sans-serif">Specific text
            changes:</font></div>
        <div style=""><font face="arial, sans-serif"><br>
          </font></div>
        <div><font face="arial, sans-serif">1. number resources</font></div>
        <div> <font face="arial, sans-serif"><br>
          </font></div>
        <div><font face="arial, sans-serif">I agree we should try to use
            number resources as much as possible where it makes sense.  </font></div>
        <div><font face="arial, sans-serif">I'm not sure who owns the
            text at this point, I think maybe the AC.  They should look
            very </font></div>
        <div><font face="arial, sans-serif">carefully at each use of IP
            address and see if number resource can be substituted
            without</font></div>
        <div style=""><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif">creating some

            strage IP address specific restriction on ASNs.</span></div>
        <div style=""><font face="arial, sans-serif"><br>
          </font></div>
        <div style=""><font face="arial, sans-serif">2.  IPv4/IPv6
            protocol differences</font></div>
        <div style=""><font face="arial, sans-serif"><br>
          </font></div>
        <div style=""><font face="arial, sans-serif">I am not opposed to
            adding "</font><span
            style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px">Conservation

            goals may vary due to the technical differences </span></div>
        <div style=""><span
            style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px">between

            IP number resources pools."</span><font face="arial,
            sans-serif">  to section 0.4 just after to the sentence "</font><span
style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px">Care
            must be </span><span
            style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px">taken </span></div>
        <div style=""><span
            style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px">to

            ensure balance with these conflicting goals given the
            resource availability, relative </span><span
            style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px">size

            of the </span></div>
        <div style=""><span
            style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px">resource,

            and number resource specific technical dynamics, for each
            type of number resource."</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">I
            felt like that was covered under "</span><span
            style="font-size:13.333333969116211px;font-family:arial,sans-serif">relative </span><span
style="font-size:13.333333969116211px;font-family:arial,sans-serif">size
            of the </span><span
            style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px">resource,

            and number resource specific </span></div>
        <div style=""><font face="arial, sans-serif">technical
            dynamics", and the following examples of how the balance
            shifts directly illustrates that.</font></div>
        <div style=""><font face="arial, sans-serif">But if it is not
            clear enough, the additional text you recommend will be
            helpful.</font></div>
        <div style=""><font face="arial, sans-serif"><br>
          </font></div>
        <div style="">3. sustainability</div>
        <div style=""><br>
        </div>
        <div style="">I'm happy to accept some text on this... but I'm
          not exactly sure what it is..</div>
      </div>
    </blockquote>
    <br>
    While using "sustainability" instead of "conservation" would be a
    textual change, it might be a positive change.  To me what the RIRs
    do with number resources today are more closely aligned with the
    definition of sustainability vs conservation.  <br>
    <br>
    Sustainability to me means managing a resource for all
    stakeholders.  Conservation sometimes means preserving the status
    quo or excluding certain uses to protect the resource.<br>
    <br>
    The word "conservation" appears 3 times in the current posted
    draft.  Just substituting the word "sustainability" seems to make
    sense to me.  This might however be too much a of a jump for others.<br>
    <br>
    <blockquote
cite="mid:CAC4yj2XMe-kecYXb5_t48VdtmhVVjDkpaM0tEjyh2O8SH8c8zA@mail.gmail.com"
      type="cite">
      <div dir="ltr">
        <div style=""> <br>
        </div>
        <div style="">4. documentation to promote increased utilization</div>
        <div style=""><br>
        </div>
        <div style="">So I think there are a number of reasons accurate
          documentation is important, </div>
        <div style="">and I think one of them is so that the RIR can
          measure utilization and judge </div>
        <div style="">current usage prior to deciding to give additional
          space.  This process causes</div>
        <div style="">more efficient utilization over all.</div>
        <div style=""><br>
        </div>
        <div style="">I think this aspect is important, and should be
          included.  It is possible the some </div>
        <div style="">word smithing may be in order.  </div>
        <div style=""><br>
        </div>
        <div style=""><span
            style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px">"Resource

            holders will be required to provide an accounting of
            resources currently held  </span></div>
        <div style=""><span
            style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px">in

            order to provide the necessary transparency and
            accountability.  This information provides</span></div>
        <div style=""><font face="arial, sans-serif">IRs the ability to
            measure efficient utilization of current space prior to
            allocating or assigning</font></div>
        <div style=""><font face="arial, sans-serif">additional space."</font></div>
      </div>
    </blockquote>
    <font face="arial, sans-serif"><br>
      I the above proposed text is pretty good.  <br>
    </font><br>
    <blockquote
cite="mid:CAC4yj2XMe-kecYXb5_t48VdtmhVVjDkpaM0tEjyh2O8SH8c8zA@mail.gmail.com"
      type="cite">
      <div dir="ltr">
        <div style=""><br>
        </div>
        <div style="">5. transfers</div>
        <div style=""><br>
        </div>
        <div style="">I agree, the details of transfer policy should be
          in the "main" portion of the NRPM, and already is, </div>
        <div style="">and that is where the details of transfers should
          be documented.</div>
        <div style=""><br>
        </div>
        <div style="">But I also think RFC-2050 gives us some high level
          guiding principles wrt transfers:<br>
          A. RIRs must approve<br>
          B. must be consistent with the criteria as if they were
          requesting an IP address directly</div>
        <div style=""><br>
        </div>
        <div style="">I think these principles should be included.</div>
        <div style=""><br>
        </div>
        <div style="">I am not opposed to the text "RIRs shall determine
          IP number resources transfer policies through </div>
        <div style="">the<span
            style="font-size:13.333333969116211px;font-family:arial,sans-serif">ir

            community driven policy development process."  In fact all
            policies (except emergency ones) </span></div>
        <div style=""><span
            style="font-size:13.333333969116211px;font-family:arial,sans-serif">are

            determined by the community through the PDP...b</span><span
style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px">ut
            I'm not sure that changes anything.</span></div>
      </div>
    </blockquote>
    <br>
    See above proposed text and comments.<br>
    <br>
    <blockquote
cite="mid:CAC4yj2XMe-kecYXb5_t48VdtmhVVjDkpaM0tEjyh2O8SH8c8zA@mail.gmail.com"
      type="cite">
      <div dir="ltr">
        <div style=""><span
            style="font-size:13.333333969116211px;font-family:arial,sans-serif"><br>
          </span></div>
        <div style="">6. audit</div>
        <div style=""><br>
        </div>
        <div style="">I think some guiding principle text is important
          here.   This text was lifter from RFC-2050.  </div>
        <div style="">Again, not intending to create
          new capabilities here, but think this principle (in some form
          is important)</div>
        <div><br>
        </div>
        <div style=""><br>
        </div>
        <div style="">If the community thinks it is superseded by text
          in the NRPM and RSA, I am happy to use that text as </div>
        <div style="">a basis for pulling out some high-level
          principles.</div>
        <div style=""><br>
        </div>
        <div style="">Is there RSA or NRPM text that is high level
          enough to use here?  How would you propose to create</div>
        <div style="">high level principles from the RSA and NRPM text?</div>
        <div style=""><br>
        </div>
        <div style="">___Jason</div>
        <div style=""><br>
        </div>
        <div style=""><span
            style="font-size:13.333333969116211px;font-family:arial,sans-serif"><br>
          </span></div>
        <div style=""><font face="arial, sans-serif"><br>
          </font></div>
        <div style=""><font face="arial, sans-serif"> </font></div>
        <div class="gmail_extra"><br>
          <br>
          <div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 1:25 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">
              <div text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
                <div>Hi Jason,
                  <div><br>
                    <br>
                    On 5/28/2013 9:04 PM, Jason Schiller wrote:<br>
                  </div>
                </div>
                <div>
                  <blockquote type="cite">
                    <div dir="ltr">Andrew thanks for your feed back.
                      <div><br>
                      </div>
                      <div>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>
                </div>
                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.
                <div><br>
                  <br>
                  <blockquote 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>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>
                </div>
                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>
                <div> <br>
                  <blockquote 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">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">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"><br>
                        </div>
                        <div class="gmail_extra">Do you have concerns
                          about where this text is located?</div>
                        <div class="gmail_extra"><br>
                        </div>
                      </div>
                    </div>
                  </blockquote>
                  <br>
                </div>
                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>
                <div> <br>
                  <blockquote type="cite">
                    <div dir="ltr">
                      <div>
                        <div class="gmail_extra">---</div>
                        <div class="gmail_extra"> <br>
                        </div>
                        <div class="gmail_extra">Andrew writes:<br>
                        </div>
                        <div class="gmail_extra"><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><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> <br>
                        </div>
                        <div>Does that meet your concern about your
                          proposed text?</div>
                        <div><br>
                        </div>
                        <div>
                          <div class="gmail_extra">Do you have concerns
                            about where this text is located?</div>
                        </div>
                      </div>
                    </div>
                  </blockquote>
                  <br>
                </div>
                Perhaps just keeping it all in 0.4 is best.
                <div><br>
                  <br>
                  <blockquote type="cite">
                    <div dir="ltr">
                      <div>
                        <div>
                          <div><br>
                          </div>
                          <div> Should I repeat the paragraph in 0.1,
                            0.1.1, and 0.4?</div>
                        </div>
                        <div class="gmail_extra"><br>
                        </div>
                      </div>
                    </div>
                  </blockquote>
                </div>
                I wouldn't repeat the paragraph.<br>
                <br>
                <blockquote type="cite">
                  <div dir="ltr">
                    <div>
                      <div>
                        <div class="gmail_extra">---</div>
                        <div class="gmail_extra">Andrew writes:</div>
                        <div class="gmail_extra">
                          <div
                            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><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><span
                            style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px"><br>
                          </span></div>
                      </div>
                      <div>
                        <div><span
                            style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px">RFC-2050


                            3.3 says:</span></div>
                        <div><span
                            style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px">"</span><span
                            style="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>
                  </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.
                <div><br>
                  <br>
                  <blockquote type="cite">
                    <div dir="ltr">
                      <div>
                        <div><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>
                </div>
                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.
                <div><br>
                  <br>
                  <blockquote type="cite">
                    <div dir="ltr">
                      <div>
                        <div>
                          <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><span
                            style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px">"</span><span
                            style="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>
                </div>
                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.
                <div><br>
                  <br>
                  <blockquote type="cite">
                    <div dir="ltr">
                      <div>
                        <div> 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>
                </div>
                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.
                <div><br>
                  <br>
                  <blockquote 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><span
                            style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px">Can


                            you elaborate on the lightening rod potin?</span></div>
                        <div><span
                            style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px"><br>
                          </span></div>
                      </div>
                    </div>
                  </blockquote>
                </div>
                See above comments.
                <div><br>
                  <blockquote type="cite">
                    <div dir="ltr">
                      <div>
                        <div><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><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><span
                            style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px">mean


                            something else.</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">What


                            am I missing here?</span></div>
                        <br>
                      </div>
                    </div>
                  </blockquote>
                  <br>
                </div>
                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.
                <div>
                  <div><br>
                    <br>
                    <blockquote type="cite">
                      <div dir="ltr">
                        <div>
                          <div class="gmail_extra"><br>
                          </div>
                          <div class="gmail_extra">Andrew writes:</div>
                          <div class="gmail_extra">
                            <div
                              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
                              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><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><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><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><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">Andrew


                              writes:</span></div>
                          <div><span
                              style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px">></span></div>
                          <div>
                            <div
                              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><font face="arial, sans-serif">I think
                              the point is to demonstrate reassignment
                              data to demonstrate efficient utilization.
                               </font></div>
                          <div><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><span
                              style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px">Andrew


                              writes:</span></div>
                          <div><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><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
                              style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px">>hierarchical


                              aggregation are often conflicting goals."<br>
                            </div>
                            <div
                              style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px">
                              <br>
                            </div>
                            <div
                              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
                              style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px">
                              conflicts between all three:</div>
                            <div
                              style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px"><br>
                            </div>
                            <div><font face="arial, sans-serif">efficient utilization


                                vs justified need
                                vs hierarchical aggregation.  </font></div>
                            <div
                              style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px"><br>
                            </div>
                            <div
                              style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px">How


                              about:</div>
                            <div
                              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>hierarchical aggregation are often
                                conflicting goals."<br>
                              </div>
                              <div><br>
                              </div>
                            </div>
                            <div
                              style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px"><br>
                            </div>
                            <div
                              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"><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><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>> ## * ##<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><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>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><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><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><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><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>hierarchical aggregation are often
                                  conflicting goals."<br>
                                  <br>
                                </div>
                                Use the new LIR/ISP convention instead
                                of "Internet Service Providers"<br>
                                <div>
                                  <div><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"
                                      target="_blank">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"
                                      target="_blank">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"
                                      target="_blank">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"
                                      target="_blank">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="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>
                  </div>
                </div>
              </div>
            </blockquote>
          </div>
          <br>
          <br clear="all">
          <div><br>
          </div>
          -- <br>
          <font color="#555555" face="'courier new', monospace">
            <div><span style="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>
    </blockquote>
    <br>
  </body>
</html>