<div dir="ltr">I haven't seen any progress on this and though I would bump the thread...<div><br></div><div>The problem as I understand it is that transfers are hard, and you cannot predict what you will get approved for.</div><div><br></div><div>In my simplified approach, an organization should easily know how much address space they are holding, and if it will pass the simple test of:</div><div>1. is each aggregate more than 50% in use</div><div>2. is all my IP space more that 80% in use.</div><div><br></div><div>And they know they can complete one or more transfers up to doubling over the next two years. <br><div><br></div><div>comments in line </div><div><br></div><div>__Jason</div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 1:09 AM, Scott Leibrand <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:scottleibrand@gmail.com" target="_blank">scottleibrand@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_extra"><div class="gmail_quote">Thanks for the constructive suggestions. Let me see (inline below) if I understand exactly what you're saying.</div><div class="gmail_quote"><br></div><div class="gmail_quote"><span class="">On Wed, Feb 10, 2016 at 9:31 PM, Jason Schiller <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:jschiller@google.com" target="_blank">jschiller@google.com</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 dir="ltr">I oppose as written.<div><br></div><div>I opposed ARIN-2015-3 and I oppose this draft policy on the same grounds. </div><div>I support simplifying some transfers and keeping the more complicated old rules for others in general...</div><div><br></div><div>However, the policy as written requires no<span style="font-size:12.8px"> real, tangible, and verifiable claim. Without such a check justified need for transfers simply becomes a 2 year future looking projection, and with sufficient arm waving an easy end run around justified need.</span></div><div><div style="font-size:12.8px"><br></div><div style="font-size:12.8px">I could certainly get on board if there were some other tangible and verifiable claim to show there was a real commitment to use half the address space within two years.</div></div><div style="font-size:12.8px"><br></div><div style="font-size:12.8px">I choose Scott's email to reply to because I like his approach in general.</div><div style="font-size:12.8px"><br></div><div style="font-size:12.8px"><span><div style="font-size:12.8px">1. Make an agreement to acquire addresses in the quantity you believe you need.</div><div style="font-size:12.8px">2. If that agreement brings your total address holdings to less than 2x your current or 24-month projected usage, get easy approval for the transfer from ARIN under the <span style="font-size:12.8px">Simplified requirements for demonstrated need for IPv4 transfers defined in this draft policy.</span></div><div style="font-size:12.8px"><span style="font-size:12.8px">3. Skip the LOA and ongoing legal stuff.</span></div><div style="font-size:12.8px"><span style="font-size:12.8px">4. Use the addresses.</span></div><div><span style="font-size:12.8px"><br></span></div></span><div><span style="font-size:12.8px">I would suggest a slight modification and a slight clarification.</span></div><div><span style="font-size:12.8px"><br></span></div><span style="font-size:12.8px"><font color="#888888"></font></span></div><div><span><div style="font-size:12.8px">1. Make an agreement to acquire addresses in the quantity you believe you need.</div></span><div style="font-size:12.8px">2. If that agreement brings your total address holdings to less than 2x your current holdings </div><div style="font-size:12.8px"> And your current holdings are > 80% utilized in aggregate and no less that 50% per resource,</div><div style="font-size:12.8px"> then you qualify for a simplified transfer.</div></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div></span><div>So if I understand correctly, you're suggesting that we reinstate the >80% overall and <span style="font-size:12.8px">50% per-resource </span>utilization requirements for simplified transfers, but once an organization has met that threshold, they can qualify for a simplified transfer that will get them up to 2x their current holdings? (You removed "<span style="font-size:12.8px">or 24-month projected usage".)</span></div></div></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Yes. from a simplified perspective... </div><div>if you have space and it is efficiently utilized (over 80% on average, and not block less than 50%) </div><div>then you are pre-approved to make one or more transfers within a two year window, </div><div>up to doubling your current holdings </div><div><br></div><div>You can re-verify efficient use at any time, and get a new two year window to to make one or more transfers</div><div>up to doubling your current holdings. </div><div><br></div><div>The un-simple process is still an avenue.</div><div><br></div><div>There probably needs to be some accommodation for a simple process for non-address holders. </div><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_extra"><div class="gmail_quote"><div><br></div><div>The proposed text as written ("IPv4 transfer recipients must demonstrate (and an officer of the requesting organization must attest) that they will use at least 50% of their aggregate IPv4 addresses (including the requested resources) on an operational network within 24 months.") is more liberal than that on two counts: 1) it does not include any requirement for utilization level of current resources, and 2) it allows the transfer of resources up to 2x the 24-month projection (as attested by an officer). I understand your objection to 2), but can you clarify why you think 1) is problematic?</div><div><br></div><div>I would like to get more feedback from others here on PPML as to how comfortable we are trusting officer attestations of forward-looking projections, plus the need to shell out real hard cash for any space obtained, as a limit on any fraudulent or anticompetitive behavior.</div><div><br></div><div>*If* a lot of people are uncomfortable with trusting officer-attested forward-looking projections, then another middle ground would be to simply limit simplified transfers to 2x current holdings. I think that would be sufficient for most organizations, and any for whom RSA section 4 is a better option can of course elect to use that, as you mentioned in your #3 below. It would also address your desire for a "<span style="font-size:12.8px">tangible and verifiable claim to show there was a real commitment to use half the address space within two years", because they would actually be required to demonstrate use of half the resulting address space holdings before they qualify for the simplified transfer at all.</span></div><div><span style="font-size:12.8px"><br></span></div><div><span style="font-size:12.8px">Thoughts?</span></div><span class="HOEnZb"><font color="#888888"><div><span style="font-size:12.8px"><br></span></div><div><span style="font-size:12.8px">-Scott</span></div></font></span><div><div class="h5"><div> </div><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 dir="ltr"><div><div style="font-size:12.8px">3. You can still qualify for a two year supply under the current unsimplified policy</div><div style="font-size:12.8px"> You can get twice your last year's run rate </div><div style="font-size:12.8px"> if your current holding are > 80% utilization in aggregate <span style="font-size:12.8px">and no less that 50% per resource,</span></div><div><span style="font-size:12.8px">4. Sign an RSA</span></div><div><span style="font-size:12.8px">5. Use the addresses</span></div><div><span style="font-size:12.8px"><br></span></div><div><span style="font-size:12.8px">Note: sources of a transfer still:</span></div><div><span style="font-size:12.8px">- must be the current (dispute free) registered holder of the IPv4 address space</span></div><div><span style="font-size:12.8px">- must not have received a transfer, allocation or assignment from ARIN in the last year </span></div><div><span style="font-size:12.8px"> (not including M&A)</span></div><div><span style="font-size:12.8px">- minimum /24</span></div><div><span style="font-size:12.8px"><br></span></div><div><span style="font-size:12.8px"><br></span></div><div><span style="font-size:12.8px">Neither Scott's nor my approach here deal with organizations that have no resources.</span></div><div><span style="font-size:12.8px"><br></span></div><div><span style="font-size:12.8px">I (and MJ) tried a more complicated version of this as ARIN-2014-20.</span></div><div><span style="font-size:12.8px"><br></span></div><div><span style="font-size:12.8px">Scott, do you want to consider my (friendly) amendment and draft some text? </span></div><div><span style="font-size:12.8px">Do you want to consider what to do for organizations with no resources?</span></div><div><span style="font-size:12.8px"><br></span></div><div><span style="font-size:12.8px"><br></span></div><div style="font-size:12.8px"><span style="font-size:12.8px">___Jason</span></div></div><div style="font-size:12.8px"><br></div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div><div>On Mon, Oct 5, 2015 at 4:30 PM, Scott Leibrand <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:scottleibrand@gmail.com" target="_blank">scottleibrand@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br></div></div><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><div><div dir="ltr">I believe we should make it easy to:<div><br></div><div>1. Make an agreement to acquire addresses in the quantity you believe you need.</div><div>2. If that agreement brings your total address holdings to less than 2x your current or 24-month projected usage, get easy approval for the transfer from ARIN under the <span style="font-size:12.8px">Simplified requirements for demonstrated need for IPv4 transfers defined in this draft policy.</span></div><div><span style="font-size:12.8px">3. Skip the LOA and ongoing legal stuff.</span></div><div><span style="font-size:12.8px">4. Use the addresses.</span></div><span><font color="#888888"><div><span style="font-size:12.8px"><br></span></div><div><span style="font-size:12.8px">-Scott</span></div></font></span></div><div><div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Mon, Oct 5, 2015 at 1:07 PM, Martin Hannigan <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:hannigan@gmail.com" target="_blank">hannigan@gmail.com</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 dir="ltr"><br><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote"><span>On Mon, Oct 5, 2015 at 3:29 PM, Scott Leibrand <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:scottleibrand@gmail.com" target="_blank">scottleibrand@gmail.com</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 dir="ltr">Reducing the burden on ARIN staff is not part of the problem statement for this proposal (though it might be a side effect, depending on how they implement it). The main goal here is to reduce the administrative burden on organizations who need to acquire IPv4 space via transfer. That burden may actually be higher for smaller entities who don't have experience with and processes in place for jumping through ARIN's hoops.<div><br></div><div>I don't think this policy would have much impact on the ability of large well-funded entities to purchase as much address space as they like. Currently, those organizations simply write a contract that gives them full rights to the address space they're buying, and allows them to transfer the space with ARIN whenever they are ready to put it into use on their network (or can otherwise pass ARIN's needs justification tests).<span><font color="#888888"><br><div><br></div><div><br></div></font></span></div></div></blockquote><div><br><br></div></span><div>Let me give you a real world example.<br><br></div><div>1. Buy rights to use addresses in any quantity you believe you need<br></div><div>2. Use those addresses as you need them, assuming the agreement you made with the party works properly<br></div><div>3. Get an LOA from the documented owner<br></div><div>4. Bypass ARIN entirely<br></div><div>5. Use the addresses.<br><br></div><div>How do you think we should solve that problem?<br><br><br></div><div>Best,<br><br></div><div>-M<<br><br><br> <br></div></div></div></div>
</blockquote></div><br></div>
</div></div><br></div></div><span>_______________________________________________<br>
PPML<br>
You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to<br>
the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (<a href="mailto: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" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml</a><br>
Please contact <a href="mailto:info@arin.net" target="_blank">info@arin.net</a> if you experience any issues.<br></span></blockquote></div><span><font color="#888888"><br><br clear="all"><div><br></div>-- <br><div><font color="#555555" face="'courier new', monospace"><div><span style="color:rgb(0,0,0);font-family:arial"><font color="#555555" face="'courier new', monospace">_______________________________________________________<br></font><div><font face="'courier new', monospace">Jason Schiller|NetOps|<a href="mailto:jschiller@google.com" target="_blank">jschiller@google.com</a>|<a href="tel:571-266-0006" value="+15712660006" target="_blank">571-266-0006</a></font></div><div><font face="'courier new', monospace"><br></font></div></span></div></font></div>
</font></span></div>
</blockquote></div></div></div><br></div></div>
</blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><div><br></div>-- <br><div class="gmail_signature"><font color="#555555" face="'courier new', monospace"><div><span style="color:rgb(0,0,0);font-family:arial"><font color="#555555" face="'courier new', monospace">_______________________________________________________<br></font><div><font face="'courier new', monospace">Jason Schiller|NetOps|<a 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></div>