I am in support of the draft policy...however, if David is correct, and I notice that John differs on that...re runout timescale, then options 3&4 do not look acceptable.
And the Dul modified text, does seem to add clarity ..certainly on my mind....But i have not seen any further comments on the modified draft. RD On Jan 8, 2015 10:57 PM, <[email protected]> wrote: Send ARIN-PPML mailing list submissions to [email protected] To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to [email protected] You can reach the person managing the list at [email protected] When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of ARIN-PPML digest..." Today's Topics: 1. Re: Draft Policy ARIN-2014-21: Modification to CI Pool Size per Section 4.4 (David Farmer) 2. Re: Draft Policy ARIN-2014-21: Modification to CI Pool Size per Section 4.4 (Scott Leibrand) 3. Re: Draft Policy ARIN-2014-21: Modification to CI Pool Size per Section 4.4 (John Curran) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Thu, 08 Jan 2015 19:33:25 -0600 From: David Farmer <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Draft Policy ARIN-2014-21: Modification to CI Pool Size per Section 4.4 Message-ID: <[email protected]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Now that we are on the other side of the Holidays, I would like to prompt a little more discussion of this Draft Policy. On PPML, there have been 2 clear statements of support, no opposition, a proposal to modify the policy text, primarily consisting of editorial changes for the broader section 4.4, and significant side discussion not directly related to the policy itself. As shepherd, I anticipate this policy going to the PPC in San Antonio at NANOG next month in its current state as a Draft policy. Then subsequent to and based on feedback from San Antonio, maybe making some minor changes, advancing this policy to Recommended Draft policy prior to the PPM in San Francisco in April. Assuming no opposition develops against the proposal. On the current trajectory for this proposal implementation is likely sometime in June, its entirely possible that the ARIN Free Pool would have run out before implementation of this policy can take place. There are several options to deal with this issue; 1. Advance the policy to Recommended Draft prior to the PPC in San Antonio, moving likely implementation to sometime in April. 2. Request that the Board instruct ARIN Staff to reserve a /16 in anticipation of this policy, imminently. With this option a reservation could reasonably occur in February or March with policy implementation on its current trajectory, likely June. 3. Stay on the current trajectory, get IPv4 address space for the policy from returned or recovered space address space, and what little if any space is the the ARIN Free Pool at implementation, likely June. Its not likely there will be a single contiguous block, likely a hodgepodge of smaller blocks, and it may take a while to collect a /16 for the reservation. 4. Do nothing, let events overtake the policy if they do, maybe abandoning the policy for lack of IPv4 address space late in the process. There are likely other variations on these themes. Regarding option #1: It might be possible to advance this proposal as-is to Recommended Draft prior to the PPC in San Antonio, at the January AC meeting. However, in order to justify recommending this to the AC, I will need to see significantly more support for this policy on PPML prior to the next AC meeting in two weeks. Even then it is likely not possible to advance the proposal prior to the PPC in San Antonio at this point, its less than a month away. I will raise option #2 with the AC at our meeting in two weeks. However, for this options to even be considered, I'm quite sure that both the AC and the Board will want to see significant community support on PPML before they would moving forward with such an option. I am interested to hear the community's opinions on the issue of this policy and the timing of ARIN Free Pool run out. Do you support any of the above options? Some other option? So, if you support this policy, and particularly if you think this policy should go to the PPC at NANOG in San Antonio in February as Recommended Draft policy please speak up ASAP. Do you have comments on or support the alternate text proposed in the email at this link? http://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/2014-December/029565.html Finally, if anyone opposes this policy it is important to speak up, as at this point no one has expressed any opposition to the policy at all. Thanks and I look forward to your comments. On 11/25/14 14:35 , ARIN wrote: > On 20 November 2014 the ARIN Advisory Council (AC) accepted > "ARIN-prop-213 Modification to CI Pool Size per Section 4.4" as a Draft > Policy. > > Draft Policy ARIN-2014-21 is below and can be found at: > https://www.arin.net/policy/proposals/2014_21.html > > You are encouraged to discuss the merits and your concerns of Draft > Policy 2014-21 on the Public Policy Mailing List. > > The AC will evaluate the discussion in order to assess the conformance > of this draft policy with ARIN's Principles of Internet Number Resource > Policy as stated in the PDP. Specifically, these principles are: > > * Enabling Fair and Impartial Number Resource Administration > * Technically Sound > * Supported by the Community > > The ARIN Policy Development Process (PDP) can be found at: > https://www.arin.net/policy/pdp.html > > Draft Policies and Proposals under discussion can be found at: > https://www.arin.net/policy/proposals/index.html > > Regards, > > Communications and Member Services > American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN) > > > ## * ## > > > Draft Policy ARIN-2014-21 > Modification to CI Pool Size per Section 4.4 > > Date: 25 November 2014 > > Problem Statement: > > At the time that this section of policy was written, IXP growth in North > America was stagnant. Efforts of late have increased significantly > within the IXP standards and other communities to improve critical > infrastructure in North America. This effort is paying dividends and we > project that a /16 will not be enough to continue to improve global > interconnect conditions and support needed IXP CI infrastructure. > > Policy statement: > > Change to text in section 4.4 Micro Allocations: > > Current text: > > ARIN will place an equivalent of a /16 of IPv4 address space in a > reserve for Critical Infrastructure, as defined in section 4.4. If at > the end of the policy term there is unused address space remaining in > this pool, ARIN staff is authorized to utilize this space in a manner > consistent with community expectations. > > Proposed text to replace current text entirely: > > ARIN will place an equivalent of a /15 of IPv4 address space in a > reserve for Critical Infrastructure, as defined in section 4.4. > > Timetable for implementation: Immediate -- ================================================ David Farmer Email: [email protected] Office of Information Technology University of Minnesota 2218 University Ave SE Phone: 1-612-626-0815 Minneapolis, MN 55414-3029 Cell: 1-612-812-9952 ================================================ ------------------------------ Message: 2 Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2015 17:50:57 -0800 From: Scott Leibrand <[email protected]> To: David Farmer <[email protected]> Cc: ARIN-PPML List <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Draft Policy ARIN-2014-21: Modification to CI Pool Size per Section 4.4 Message-ID: <CAGkMwz4EGR_YExYoUp7xxvSuQSUT40Eczzm8f5f2u9XeQs6=g...@mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" How much is ARIN going to get from the next round of IANA returned space distribution? It's more than a /16, isn't it? -Scott On Thu, Jan 8, 2015 at 5:33 PM, David Farmer <[email protected]> wrote: > Now that we are on the other side of the Holidays, I would like to prompt > a little more discussion of this Draft Policy. > > On PPML, there have been 2 clear statements of support, no opposition, a > proposal to modify the policy text, primarily consisting of editorial > changes for the broader section 4.4, and significant side discussion not > directly related to the policy itself. > > As shepherd, I anticipate this policy going to the PPC in San Antonio at > NANOG next month in its current state as a Draft policy. Then subsequent > to and based on feedback from San Antonio, maybe making some minor changes, > advancing this policy to Recommended Draft policy prior to the PPM in San > Francisco in April. Assuming no opposition develops against the proposal. > > On the current trajectory for this proposal implementation is likely > sometime in June, its entirely possible that the ARIN Free Pool would have > run out before implementation of this policy can take place. There are > several options to deal with this issue; > > 1. Advance the policy to Recommended Draft prior to the PPC in San > Antonio, moving likely implementation to sometime in April. > > 2. Request that the Board instruct ARIN Staff to reserve a /16 in > anticipation of this policy, imminently. With this option a > reservation could reasonably occur in February or March with > policy implementation on its current trajectory, likely June. > > 3. Stay on the current trajectory, get IPv4 address space for the > policy from returned or recovered space address space, and what > little if any space is the the ARIN Free Pool at implementation, > likely June. Its not likely there will be a single contiguous > block, likely a hodgepodge of smaller blocks, and it may take a > while to collect a /16 for the reservation. > > 4. Do nothing, let events overtake the policy if they do, maybe > abandoning the policy for lack of IPv4 address space late in the > process. > > There are likely other variations on these themes. > > Regarding option #1: It might be possible to advance this proposal as-is > to Recommended Draft prior to the PPC in San Antonio, at the January AC > meeting. However, in order to justify recommending this to the AC, I will > need to see significantly more support for this policy on PPML prior to the > next AC meeting in two weeks. Even then it is likely not possible to > advance the proposal prior to the PPC in San Antonio at this point, its > less than a month away. > > I will raise option #2 with the AC at our meeting in two weeks. However, > for this options to even be considered, I'm quite sure that both the AC and > the Board will want to see significant community support on PPML before > they would moving forward with such an option. > > I am interested to hear the community's opinions on the issue of this > policy and the timing of ARIN Free Pool run out. Do you support any of the > above options? Some other option? > > So, if you support this policy, and particularly if you think this policy > should go to the PPC at NANOG in San Antonio in February as Recommended > Draft policy please speak up ASAP. > > Do you have comments on or support the alternate text proposed in the > email at this link? > http://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/2014-December/029565.html > > Finally, if anyone opposes this policy it is important to speak up, as at > this point no one has expressed any opposition to the policy at all. > > Thanks and I look forward to your comments. > > > On 11/25/14 14:35 , ARIN wrote: > >> On 20 November 2014 the ARIN Advisory Council (AC) accepted >> "ARIN-prop-213 Modification to CI Pool Size per Section 4.4" as a Draft >> Policy. >> >> Draft Policy ARIN-2014-21 is below and can be found at: >> https://www.arin.net/policy/proposals/2014_21.html >> >> You are encouraged to discuss the merits and your concerns of Draft >> Policy 2014-21 on the Public Policy Mailing List. >> >> The AC will evaluate the discussion in order to assess the conformance >> of this draft policy with ARIN's Principles of Internet Number Resource >> Policy as stated in the PDP. Specifically, these principles are: >> >> * Enabling Fair and Impartial Number Resource Administration >> * Technically Sound >> * Supported by the Community >> >> The ARIN Policy Development Process (PDP) can be found at: >> https://www.arin.net/policy/pdp.html >> >> Draft Policies and Proposals under discussion can be found at: >> https://www.arin.net/policy/proposals/index.html >> >> Regards, >> >> Communications and Member Services >> American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN) >> >> >> ## * ## >> >> >> Draft Policy ARIN-2014-21 >> Modification to CI Pool Size per Section 4.4 >> >> Date: 25 November 2014 >> >> Problem Statement: >> >> At the time that this section of policy was written, IXP growth in North >> America was stagnant. Efforts of late have increased significantly >> within the IXP standards and other communities to improve critical >> infrastructure in North America. This effort is paying dividends and we >> project that a /16 will not be enough to continue to improve global >> interconnect conditions and support needed IXP CI infrastructure. >> >> Policy statement: >> >> Change to text in section 4.4 Micro Allocations: >> >> Current text: >> >> ARIN will place an equivalent of a /16 of IPv4 address space in a >> reserve for Critical Infrastructure, as defined in section 4.4. If at >> the end of the policy term there is unused address space remaining in >> this pool, ARIN staff is authorized to utilize this space in a manner >> consistent with community expectations. >> >> Proposed text to replace current text entirely: >> >> ARIN will place an equivalent of a /15 of IPv4 address space in a >> reserve for Critical Infrastructure, as defined in section 4.4. >> >> Timetable for implementation: Immediate >> > > > -- > ================================================ > David Farmer Email: [email protected] > Office of Information Technology > University of Minnesota > 2218 University Ave SE Phone: 1-612-626-0815 > Minneapolis, MN 55414-3029 Cell: 1-612-812-9952 > ================================================ > _______________________________________________ > PPML > You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to > the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List ([email protected]). > Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: > http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml > Please contact [email protected] if you experience any issues. > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: < http://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20150108/3c1f5196/attachment-0001.html > ------------------------------ Message: 3 Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2015 02:56:56 +0000 From: John Curran <[email protected]> To: Scott Leibrand <[email protected]> Cc: ARIN-PPML List <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Draft Policy ARIN-2014-21: Modification to CI Pool Size per Section 4.4 Message-ID: <[email protected]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" On Jan 8, 2015, at 5:50 PM, Scott Leibrand <[email protected]> wrote: > > How much is ARIN going to get from the next round of IANA returned space distribution? It's more than a /16, isn't it? Per the Global Policy for Post Exhaustion IPv4 Allocation Mechanisms by the IANA, the allocation size technically is set based on the recovered pool size at the time of the next allocation (1 March 2015). If I recall correctly, the estimate is that each RIR will receive IPv4 space equivalent to a /12 block on that date. FYI, /John John Curran President and CEO ARIN ------------------------------ _______________________________________________ ARIN-PPML mailing list [email protected] http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml End of ARIN-PPML Digest, Vol 115, Issue 2 *****************************************
_______________________________________________ PPML You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List ([email protected]). Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml Please contact [email protected] if you experience any issues.
