<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=utf-8">
<meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered medium)">
<style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:Helvetica;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 2 2 2 2 2 4;}
@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:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-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;}
p.msonormal0, li.msonormal0, div.msonormal0
{mso-style-name:msonormal;
mso-margin-top-alt:auto;
margin-right:0in;
mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;
margin-left:0in;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
span.EmailStyle18
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;}
@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-CA" link="blue" vlink="purple">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><a name="_MailEndCompose"><span style="mso-fareast-language:EN-US">I support the policy as written.
<o:p></o:p></span></a></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="mso-bookmark:_MailEndCompose"><span style="mso-fareast-language:EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="mso-bookmark:_MailEndCompose"><span style="mso-fareast-language:EN-US">If the stick isn’t big enough it appears a simple policy change could be used, not just for this section but all the other areas “should” is used.<o:p></o:p></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="mso-bookmark:_MailEndCompose"><span style="mso-fareast-language:EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="mso-bookmark:_MailEndCompose"><span style="mso-fareast-language:EN-US">I would like to point out that “should” is currently used 30 times in the NRPM.
<o:p></o:p></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="mso-bookmark:_MailEndCompose"><span style="mso-fareast-language:EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="mso-bookmark:_MailEndCompose"><span style="mso-fareast-language:EN-US">In reading John’s explanation, I can’t see “should” and “shall” being considered an editorial change. To extend the policy cycle to another meeting would
be far worse.<o:p></o:p></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="mso-bookmark:_MailEndCompose"><span style="mso-fareast-language:EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="mso-bookmark:_MailEndCompose"><span style="mso-fareast-language:EN-US">Out of curiosity, how often has ARIN had to deal with SWIP issues like this, where the other party ignored you?<o:p></o:p></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="mso-bookmark:_MailEndCompose"><span style="mso-fareast-language:EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="mso-bookmark:_MailEndCompose"><span style="mso-fareast-language:EN-US">Thanks,<o:p></o:p></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="mso-bookmark:_MailEndCompose"><span style="mso-fareast-language:EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="mso-bookmark:_MailEndCompose"><span style="mso-fareast-language:EN-US">Kevin Blumberg<o:p></o:p></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="mso-bookmark:_MailEndCompose"><span style="mso-fareast-language:EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="mso-bookmark:_MailEndCompose"><span style="mso-fareast-language:EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></span></p>
<span style="mso-bookmark:_MailEndCompose"></span>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span lang="EN-US">From:</span></b><span lang="EN-US"> ARIN-PPML [mailto:arin-ppml-bounces@arin.net]
<b>On Behalf Of </b>John Curran<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Wednesday, September 27, 2017 5:59 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> Jason Schiller <jschiller@google.com><br>
<b>Cc:</b> arin-ppml@arin.net<br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [arin-ppml] Recommended Draft Policy ARIN-2017-5: Improved IPv6 Registration Requirements<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">On 26 Sep 2017, at 3:18 PM, Jason Schiller <<a href="mailto:jschiller@google.com">jschiller@google.com</a>> wrote:<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<blockquote style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif">I oppose as written.
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif">There should not be a different standard of requirement for:<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif">- re-allocation<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif">- reassignment containing a /47 or more addresses<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif">- subdelegation of any size that will be individually announced<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif">which is "shall"<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif">and Registration Requested by Recipient<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif">which is "should"<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif">I would support if they are both "shall".<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif">Can ARIN staff discuss what actions it will take if an ISP's<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif">down stream customer contacts them and explains that their<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif">ISP refuses to SWIP their reassignment to them?<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif">Will they do anything more than reach out to the ISP and tell<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif">them they "should" SWIP it?<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Jason - <br>
<br>
If this policy change 2017-5 is adopted, then a provider that has IPv6 space from ARIN <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> but routinely fails to publish registration information (for /47 or larger reassignments) <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> would be in violation, and ARIN would have clear policy language that would enable <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> us to discuss with the ISP the need to publish this information in a timely manner. <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><br>
Service providers who blatantly ignore such a provision on an ongoing basis will be <br>
in the enviable position of hearing me chat with them about their obligations to follow <br>
ARIN number resource policy, including the consequences (i.e. potential revocation <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> of the IPv6 number resources.)<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> If the langauge for the new section 6.5.5.4 "Registration Requested by Recipient” <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> reads “… the ISP should register that assignment”, then ARIN would send on any<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> received customer complaint to the ISP, and remind the ISP that they should<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> follow number resource policy in this regard but not otherwise taking any action. <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> If the language for the new section 6.5.5.4 "Registration Requested by Recipient” <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> reads “… the ISP shall register that assignment”, then failure to do so would be<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> a far more serious matter that, if left unaddressed on a chronic manner, could have <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> me discussing the customer complaints as a sign of potential failure to comply with <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> number resource policy, including the consequences (i.e. potential revocation of <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> the IPv6 number resources.)<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> I would note that the community should be very clear about its intentions for ISPs<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> with regard to customer requested reassignment publication, given there is large <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> difference in obligations that result from policy language choice. ARIN staff remains, <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> as always, looking forward to implementing whatever policy emerges from the <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> consensus-based policy development process. <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Thanks!<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">/John<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">John Curran<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">President and CEO<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">American Registry for Internet Numbers<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
</body>
</html>