<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
<meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered medium)">
<style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
span.EmailStyle17
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]-->
</head>
<body lang="EN-US" link="blue" vlink="purple">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><a name="_MailEndCompose"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">Whether it’s no-op or op, please note that an LOA is actually a “Letter of Agency”. Maybe some networks now call it a Letter of Authority,
but it’s properly Agency.<o:p></o:p></span></a></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">David R Huberman<o:p></o:p></span></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">Microsoft Corporation<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">Senior IT/OPS Program Manager (GFS)<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">From:</span></b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""> arin-ppml-bounces@arin.net [mailto:arin-ppml-bounces@arin.net]
<b>On Behalf Of </b>Martin Hannigan<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Tuesday, April 1, 2014 7:23 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> Heather Schiller<br>
<b>Cc:</b> John Curran; arin-ppml@arin.net<br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [arin-ppml] 2600::/12 LOA<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">It's a no op then. There's no need to mention LOA's at all. <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><br>
On Tuesday, April 1, 2014, Heather Schiller <<a href="mailto:heather.skanks@gmail.com">heather.skanks@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<o:p></o:p></p>
<blockquote style="border:none;border-left:solid #CCCCCC 1.0pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 6.0pt;margin-left:4.8pt;margin-right:0in">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">The suggested text restricting LOA is: "ARIN will not issue a Letter of Authority (LOA) to route a research prefix unless the allocation is properly registered in whois."<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">The text does not specifically restrict ARIN from issuing an LOA altogether, it requires that the resource be registered in whois. I think the text allows them to issue LOA for research where necessary and legitimate. It should not impede
them from issuing LOA in any other circumstance (though, outside of research, I don't imagine they get many requests for LOA) Can you foresee a circumstance where it would be appropriate for ARIN to issue an LOA for something *not* registered in whois?
Do you think the current text impedes them from issuing necessary and legitimate LOA's?<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">--Heather<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 10:58 AM, Martin Hannigan <<a href="javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','hannigan@gmail.com');" target="_blank">hannigan@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<o:p></o:p></p>
<blockquote style="border:none;border-left:solid #CCCCCC 1.0pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 6.0pt;margin-left:4.8pt;margin-right:0in">
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt">On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 4:59 PM, Martin Hannigan <<a href="javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','hannigan@gmail.com');" target="_blank">hannigan@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
> On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 4:52 PM, John Curran <<a href="javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','jcurran@arin.net');" target="_blank">jcurran@arin.net</a>> wrote:<br>
>> On Mar 31, 2014, at 3:11 PM, Martin Hannigan <<a href="javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','hannigan@gmail.com');" target="_blank">hannigan@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
>><br>
>>> On Sun, Mar 30, 2014 at 5:00 AM, John Curran <<a href="javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','jcurran@arin.net');" target="_blank">jcurran@arin.net</a>> wrote:<br>
>>>><br>
>>>> NRPM 11 was designed for parties requesting allocations from ARIN for<br>
>>>> research purposes; not ARIN checking the quality/integrity of new block<br>
>>>> received from IANA. Given the recent occurance, I believe it is prudent<br>
>>>> for ARIN to utilize NRPM 11 going forward for purposes of this quality<br>
>>>> checking, as it makes visible the organization doing the testing/making<br>
>>>> use of the space, including duration of the activity and research nature,<br>
>>>> as well as reaffirming the expected uniqueness requirement.<br>
>>><br>
>>> If I understand this correctly, Matthew suggested that an update to<br>
>>> Section 11 would be more useful? If that's the case I agree. It would<br>
>>> require a few, simple, modifications.<br>
>><br>
>> I think his suggestion to make use of NRPM 11 for this purpose is quite<br>
>> excellent. It was not process that we used in the past, but shall be<br>
>> done that way going forward. To the extent that the community wishes<br>
>> to improve NRPM 11 policy text for this purpose of address space testing,<br>
>> that is also welcome.<br>
>><br>
>>> Why would ARIN ever need to issue an LOA if whatever is distributed is<br>
>>> in the registry? All the LOA responsibilities if even needed at that<br>
>>> point would fall to the registrant.<br>
>><br>
>> Agreed; that is the major benefit of taking an "NRPM 11" approach to address<br>
>> space testing - ARIN stays focused on being a registry and leaves the use of<br>
>> address space to registrants. Since registrants are unique for a given address<br>
>> block, we also preempt multiple parties with potentially conflict plans on the<br>
>> use (or routing) of any given portion of address space.<br>
>><br>
><br>
><br>
> Yes, I agree. This is the preferable route.<br>
><br>
> Best,<br>
><br>
> -M<<br>
<br>
<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal">To add to this, it appears that we can condense most of the hand<br>
waving down to a modification in Section 11.4 that adds to the end of<br>
the paragraph "All resource assignments will be registered in the ARIN<br>
WHOIS database and in a manner not conflicting with any other<br>
registrations". Or any other language that would accomplish the same<br>
thing.<br>
<br>
We ought not to specifically restrict ARIN from writing an LOA. There<br>
may be a circumstance where it is necessary and fully legitimate.<br>
Admittedly, the instances where it would be needed would be corner<br>
cases, but operators in the AP region, for example, are very strict<br>
and I've had some strange reasons for writing LOA for my own prefixes.<br>
It may also interfere with the encumbrance testing that John<br>
mentioned. I suspect there are also some other tricky authority<br>
questions.<br>
<br>
This sounds like a legitimate error to me so this should be enough to<br>
instill a codified message that we want registrations and self<br>
service. Anything else needs more attention.<o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><br>
Best,<br>
<br>
-M<<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
PPML<br>
You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to<br>
the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (<a href="javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','ARIN-PPML@arin.net');" target="_blank">ARIN-PPML@arin.net</a>).<br>
Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:<br>
<a href="http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml" target="_blank">http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml</a><br>
Please contact <a href="javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','info@arin.net');" target="_blank">
info@arin.net</a> if you experience any issues.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</body>
</html>