<p dir="ltr">I support the proposed as written.<br>
rd</p>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Apr 18, 2017 10:25 PM, <<a href="mailto:arin-ppml-request@arin.net">arin-ppml-request@arin.net</a>> wrote:<br type="attribution"><blockquote class="quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">Send ARIN-PPML mailing list submissions to<br>
<a href="mailto:arin-ppml@arin.net">arin-ppml@arin.net</a><br>
<br>
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit<br>
<a href="http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://lists.arin.net/mailman/<wbr>listinfo/arin-ppml</a><br>
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to<br>
<a href="mailto:arin-ppml-request@arin.net">arin-ppml-request@arin.net</a><br>
<br>
You can reach the person managing the list at<br>
<a href="mailto:arin-ppml-owner@arin.net">arin-ppml-owner@arin.net</a><br>
<br>
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific<br>
than "Re: Contents of ARIN-PPML digest..."<br>
<br>
<br>
Today's Topics:<br>
<br>
1. Re: LAST CALL for Recommended Draft Policy ARIN-2016-3:<br>
Alternative Simplified Criteria for Justifying Small IPv4<br>
Transfers (Brett Frankenberger)<br>
2. Re: LAST CALL for Recommended Draft Policy ARIN-2016-3:<br>
Alternative Simplified Criteria for Justifying Small IPv4<br>
Transfers (Owen DeLong)<br>
3. Re: LAST CALL for Recommended Draft Policy ARIN-2016-3:<br>
Alternative Simplified Criteria for Justifying Small IPv4<br>
Transfers (Martin Hannigan)<br>
4. Re: LAST CALL for Recommended Draft Policy ARIN-2016-3:<br>
Alternative Simplified Criteria for Justifying Small IPv4<br>
Transfers (Scott Leibrand)<br>
<br>
<br>
------------------------------<wbr>------------------------------<wbr>----------<br>
<br>
Message: 1<br>
Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2017 19:01:05 -0500<br>
From: Brett Frankenberger <<a href="mailto:rbf%2Barin-ppml@panix.com">rbf+arin-ppml@panix.com</a>><br>
To: ARIN <<a href="mailto:info@arin.net">info@arin.net</a>>, "<a href="mailto:arin-ppml@arin.net">arin-ppml@arin.net</a>" <<a href="mailto:arin-ppml@arin.net">arin-ppml@arin.net</a>><br>
Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] LAST CALL for Recommended Draft Policy<br>
ARIN-2016-3: Alternative Simplified Criteria for Justifying Small IPv4<br>
Transfers<br>
Message-ID: <<a href="mailto:20170419000105.GA1051@panix.com">20170419000105.GA1051@panix.<wbr>com</a>><br>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii<br>
<br>
> The ARIN Advisory Council (AC) met on 05 April 2017 and decided to<br>
> send the following Recommended Draft Policy to Last Call:<br>
><br>
> Recommended Draft Policy ARIN-2016-3: Alternative Simplified Criteria for<br>
> Justifying Small IPv4 Transfers<br>
><br>
> 8.5.7 Alternative Additional IPv4 Address Block Criteria<br>
><br>
> In lieu of 8.5.5 and 8.5.6, organizations may qualify for additional IPv4<br>
> address blocks by demonstrating 80% utilization of their currently<br>
> allocated space. If they do so, they qualify to receive one or more<br>
> transfers up to the total size of their current ARIN IPv4 address holdings,<br>
> with a maximum size of /16.<br>
><br>
> An organization may qualify via 8.5.7 for a total of a /16 equivalent in<br>
> any 6 month period.<br>
<br>
Little late in the game for this, I know, but this language appears<br>
ambiguous as to whether or not end-users are permitted to use this<br>
policy. "Organizations" is inclusive of end users, but "allocated" (in<br>
"allocated space") could be read to exclude organizations that only<br>
have assignments. Given the general intent of other 8.x policies to<br>
include end users and providers, I would assume that is the intent here<br>
(both other 8.x policies generally don't mention allocations without<br>
assignments or vice versa). Perhaps "allocated" should be edited to<br>
read "allocated or assigned" or something similar. (Or "transferred,<br>
allocated, or assigned" to maintain consistency with 8.3 and 8.4.)<br>
<br>
Maybe it's not an issue; perhaps ARIN could comment as to whether or<br>
not, if this policy were implemented as currently written, they would<br>
allow end-users to qualify for transfers under 8.5.7.<br>
<br>
I support this policy if it applies equally to end users and providers.<br>
<br>
-- Brett<br>
<br>
<br>
------------------------------<br>
<br>
Message: 2<br>
Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2017 18:29:35 -0700<br>
From: Owen DeLong <<a href="mailto:owen@delong.com">owen@delong.com</a>><br>
To: Brett Frankenberger <<a href="mailto:rbf%2Barin-ppml@panix.com">rbf+arin-ppml@panix.com</a>><br>
Cc: "<a href="mailto:arin-ppml@arin.net">arin-ppml@arin.net</a>" <<a href="mailto:arin-ppml@arin.net">arin-ppml@arin.net</a>><br>
Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] LAST CALL for Recommended Draft Policy<br>
ARIN-2016-3: Alternative Simplified Criteria for Justifying Small IPv4<br>
Transfers<br>
Message-ID: <<a href="mailto:6FB07699-24C2-4D1D-907A-883EF4B0F8FB@delong.com">6FB07699-24C2-4D1D-907A-<wbr>883EF4B0F8FB@delong.com</a>><br>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8<br>
<br>
<br>
> On Apr 18, 2017, at 17:01 , Brett Frankenberger <<a href="mailto:rbf%2Barin-ppml@panix.com">rbf+arin-ppml@panix.com</a>> wrote:<br>
><br>
>> The ARIN Advisory Council (AC) met on 05 April 2017 and decided to<br>
>> send the following Recommended Draft Policy to Last Call:<br>
>><br>
>> Recommended Draft Policy ARIN-2016-3: Alternative Simplified Criteria for<br>
>> Justifying Small IPv4 Transfers<br>
>><br>
>> 8.5.7 Alternative Additional IPv4 Address Block Criteria<br>
>><br>
>> In lieu of 8.5.5 and 8.5.6, organizations may qualify for additional IPv4<br>
>> address blocks by demonstrating 80% utilization of their currently<br>
>> allocated space. If they do so, they qualify to receive one or more<br>
>> transfers up to the total size of their current ARIN IPv4 address holdings,<br>
>> with a maximum size of /16.<br>
>><br>
>> An organization may qualify via 8.5.7 for a total of a /16 equivalent in<br>
>> any 6 month period.<br>
><br>
> Little late in the game for this, I know, but this language appears<br>
> ambiguous as to whether or not end-users are permitted to use this<br>
> policy. "Organizations" is inclusive of end users, but "allocated" (in<br>
> "allocated space") could be read to exclude organizations that only<br>
> have assignments. Given the general intent of other 8.x policies to<br>
> include end users and providers, I would assume that is the intent here<br>
> (both other 8.x policies generally don't mention allocations without<br>
> assignments or vice versa). Perhaps "allocated" should be edited to<br>
> read "allocated or assigned" or something similar. (Or "transferred,<br>
> allocated, or assigned" to maintain consistency with 8.3 and 8.4.)<br>
><br>
> Maybe it's not an issue; perhaps ARIN could comment as to whether or<br>
> not, if this policy were implemented as currently written, they would<br>
> allow end-users to qualify for transfers under 8.5.7.<br>
><br>
> I support this policy if it applies equally to end users and providers.<br>
><br>
> ? Brett<br>
<br>
I agree that is the intent and I will attempt to get the words ?or assigned? added<br>
to the policy before it is recommended to the board. I believe this to be an<br>
appropriate editorial change. Note, I do not speak for the AC in this regard, it<br>
is just my personal opinion and a statement of what I intend to do in the upcoming<br>
AC meeting, nothing more.<br>
<br>
Owen<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
------------------------------<br>
<br>
Message: 3<br>
Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2017 01:54:17 +0000<br>
From: Martin Hannigan <<a href="mailto:hannigan@gmail.com">hannigan@gmail.com</a>><br>
To: Brett Frankenberger <<a href="mailto:rbf%2Barin-ppml@panix.com">rbf+arin-ppml@panix.com</a>>, Owen DeLong<br>
<<a href="mailto:owen@delong.com">owen@delong.com</a>><br>
Cc: "<a href="mailto:arin-ppml@arin.net">arin-ppml@arin.net</a>" <<a href="mailto:arin-ppml@arin.net">arin-ppml@arin.net</a>><br>
Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] LAST CALL for Recommended Draft Policy<br>
ARIN-2016-3: Alternative Simplified Criteria for Justifying Small IPv4<br>
Transfers<br>
Message-ID:<br>
<CAMDXq5Os1d2GBn=<wbr>EWpcO3ZjQ2hhmU2jaf=<a href="mailto:yVKdcGp3%2BnedLJfA@mail.gmail.com">yVKdcGp3+<wbr>nedLJfA@mail.gmail.com</a>><br>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"<br>
<br>
Makes sense to me and I'm the penultimate editorial change hater.<br>
<br>
Best,<br>
<br>
-M<<br>
<br>
<br>
On Tue, Apr 18, 2017 at 21:30 Owen DeLong <<a href="mailto:owen@delong.com">owen@delong.com</a>> wrote:<br>
<br>
><br>
> > On Apr 18, 2017, at 17:01 , Brett Frankenberger <<a href="mailto:rbf%2Barin-ppml@panix.com">rbf+arin-ppml@panix.com</a>><br>
> wrote:<br>
> ><br>
> >> The ARIN Advisory Council (AC) met on 05 April 2017 and decided to<br>
> >> send the following Recommended Draft Policy to Last Call:<br>
> >><br>
> >> Recommended Draft Policy ARIN-2016-3: Alternative Simplified Criteria<br>
> for<br>
> >> Justifying Small IPv4 Transfers<br>
> >><br>
> >> 8.5.7 Alternative Additional IPv4 Address Block Criteria<br>
> >><br>
> >> In lieu of 8.5.5 and 8.5.6, organizations may qualify for additional<br>
> IPv4<br>
> >> address blocks by demonstrating 80% utilization of their currently<br>
> >> allocated space. If they do so, they qualify to receive one or more<br>
> >> transfers up to the total size of their current ARIN IPv4 address<br>
> holdings,<br>
> >> with a maximum size of /16.<br>
> >><br>
> >> An organization may qualify via 8.5.7 for a total of a /16 equivalent in<br>
> >> any 6 month period.<br>
> ><br>
> > Little late in the game for this, I know, but this language appears<br>
> > ambiguous as to whether or not end-users are permitted to use this<br>
> > policy. "Organizations" is inclusive of end users, but "allocated" (in<br>
> > "allocated space") could be read to exclude organizations that only<br>
> > have assignments. Given the general intent of other 8.x policies to<br>
> > include end users and providers, I would assume that is the intent here<br>
> > (both other 8.x policies generally don't mention allocations without<br>
> > assignments or vice versa). Perhaps "allocated" should be edited to<br>
> > read "allocated or assigned" or something similar. (Or "transferred,<br>
> > allocated, or assigned" to maintain consistency with 8.3 and 8.4.)<br>
> ><br>
> > Maybe it's not an issue; perhaps ARIN could comment as to whether or<br>
> > not, if this policy were implemented as currently written, they would<br>
> > allow end-users to qualify for transfers under 8.5.7.<br>
> ><br>
> > I support this policy if it applies equally to end users and providers.<br>
> ><br>
> > ? Brett<br>
><br>
> I agree that is the intent and I will attempt to get the words ?or<br>
> assigned? added<br>
> to the policy before it is recommended to the board. I believe this to be<br>
> an<br>
> appropriate editorial change. Note, I do not speak for the AC in this<br>
> regard, it<br>
> is just my personal opinion and a statement of what I intend to do in the<br>
> upcoming<br>
> AC meeting, nothing more.<br>
><br>
> Owen<br>
><br>
> ______________________________<wbr>_________________<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">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/<wbr>listinfo/arin-ppml</a><br>
> Please contact <a href="mailto:info@arin.net">info@arin.net</a> if you experience any issues.<br>
-------------- next part --------------<br>
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...<br>
URL: <<a href="http://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20170419/f69ac3ba/attachment-0001.html" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://lists.arin.net/<wbr>pipermail/arin-ppml/<wbr>attachments/20170419/f69ac3ba/<wbr>attachment-0001.html</a>><br>
<br>
------------------------------<br>
<br>
Message: 4<br>
Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2017 19:24:29 -0700<br>
From: Scott Leibrand <<a href="mailto:scottleibrand@gmail.com">scottleibrand@gmail.com</a>><br>
To: Martin Hannigan <<a href="mailto:hannigan@gmail.com">hannigan@gmail.com</a>><br>
Cc: Brett Frankenberger <<a href="mailto:rbf%2Barin-ppml@panix.com">rbf+arin-ppml@panix.com</a>>, Owen DeLong<br>
<<a href="mailto:owen@delong.com">owen@delong.com</a>>, "<a href="mailto:arin-ppml@arin.net">arin-ppml@arin.net</a>" <<a href="mailto:arin-ppml@arin.net">arin-ppml@arin.net</a>><br>
Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] LAST CALL for Recommended Draft Policy<br>
ARIN-2016-3: Alternative Simplified Criteria for Justifying Small IPv4<br>
Transfers<br>
Message-ID: <<a href="mailto:20CE1704-4948-4924-92BC-B349BFCE5E97@gmail.com">20CE1704-4948-4924-92BC-<wbr>B349BFCE5E97@gmail.com</a>><br>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"<br>
<br>
+1 to that being a useful editorial change consistent with the policy intent as I understand it.<br>
<br>
Scott<br>
<br>
> On Apr 18, 2017, at 6:54 PM, Martin Hannigan <<a href="mailto:hannigan@gmail.com">hannigan@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> Makes sense to me and I'm the penultimate editorial change hater.<br>
><br>
> Best,<br>
><br>
> -M<<br>
><br>
><br>
>> On Tue, Apr 18, 2017 at 21:30 Owen DeLong <<a href="mailto:owen@delong.com">owen@delong.com</a>> wrote:<br>
>><br>
>> > On Apr 18, 2017, at 17:01 , Brett Frankenberger <<a href="mailto:rbf%2Barin-ppml@panix.com">rbf+arin-ppml@panix.com</a>> wrote:<br>
>> ><br>
>> >> The ARIN Advisory Council (AC) met on 05 April 2017 and decided to<br>
>> >> send the following Recommended Draft Policy to Last Call:<br>
>> >><br>
>> >> Recommended Draft Policy ARIN-2016-3: Alternative Simplified Criteria for<br>
>> >> Justifying Small IPv4 Transfers<br>
>> >><br>
>> >> 8.5.7 Alternative Additional IPv4 Address Block Criteria<br>
>> >><br>
>> >> In lieu of 8.5.5 and 8.5.6, organizations may qualify for additional IPv4<br>
>> >> address blocks by demonstrating 80% utilization of their currently<br>
>> >> allocated space. If they do so, they qualify to receive one or more<br>
>> >> transfers up to the total size of their current ARIN IPv4 address holdings,<br>
>> >> with a maximum size of /16.<br>
>> >><br>
>> >> An organization may qualify via 8.5.7 for a total of a /16 equivalent in<br>
>> >> any 6 month period.<br>
>> ><br>
>> > Little late in the game for this, I know, but this language appears<br>
>> > ambiguous as to whether or not end-users are permitted to use this<br>
>> > policy. "Organizations" is inclusive of end users, but "allocated" (in<br>
>> > "allocated space") could be read to exclude organizations that only<br>
>> > have assignments. Given the general intent of other 8.x policies to<br>
>> > include end users and providers, I would assume that is the intent here<br>
>> > (both other 8.x policies generally don't mention allocations without<br>
>> > assignments or vice versa). Perhaps "allocated" should be edited to<br>
>> > read "allocated or assigned" or something similar. (Or "transferred,<br>
>> > allocated, or assigned" to maintain consistency with 8.3 and 8.4.)<br>
>> ><br>
>> > Maybe it's not an issue; perhaps ARIN could comment as to whether or<br>
>> > not, if this policy were implemented as currently written, they would<br>
>> > allow end-users to qualify for transfers under 8.5.7.<br>
>> ><br>
>> > I support this policy if it applies equally to end users and providers.<br>
>> ><br>
>> > ? Brett<br>
>><br>
>> I agree that is the intent and I will attempt to get the words ?or assigned? added<br>
>> to the policy before it is recommended to the board. I believe this to be an<br>
>> appropriate editorial change. Note, I do not speak for the AC in this regard, it<br>
>> is just my personal opinion and a statement of what I intend to do in the upcoming<br>
>> AC meeting, nothing more.<br>
>><br>
>> Owen<br>
>><br>
>> ______________________________<wbr>_________________<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">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/<wbr>listinfo/arin-ppml</a><br>
>> Please contact <a href="mailto:info@arin.net">info@arin.net</a> if you experience any issues.<br>
> ______________________________<wbr>_________________<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">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/<wbr>listinfo/arin-ppml</a><br>
> Please contact <a href="mailto:info@arin.net">info@arin.net</a> if you experience any issues.<br>
-------------- next part --------------<br>
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...<br>
URL: <<a href="http://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20170418/c0f7e4bd/attachment.html" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://lists.arin.net/<wbr>pipermail/arin-ppml/<wbr>attachments/20170418/c0f7e4bd/<wbr>attachment.html</a>><br>
<br>
------------------------------<br>
<br>
Subject: Digest Footer<br>
<br>
______________________________<wbr>_________________<br>
ARIN-PPML mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:ARIN-PPML@arin.net">ARIN-PPML@arin.net</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://lists.arin.net/mailman/<wbr>listinfo/arin-ppml</a><br>
<br>
------------------------------<br>
<br>
End of ARIN-PPML Digest, Vol 142, Issue 10<br>
******************************<wbr>************<br>
</blockquote></div><br></div>