I agree with Owen. I support the policy either way. Regards, Mike
-----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Owen DeLong Sent: Wednesday, January 27, 2016 8:42 PM To: David Farmer <[email protected]> Cc: ARIN PPML <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] ARIN-2015-3: Remove 30-Day Utilization Requirement in End-User IPv4 Policy While criteria as singular may not be an uncommon error, I see no reason to avoid the proper use of the word criterion. I propose changing to the following: … The basic criterion that must be met is a 50% utilization rate within one year. … Is there some perceived benefit to sticking with a common error? Owen > On Jan 27, 2016, at 14:54 , David Farmer <[email protected]> wrote: > > The following is the proposed update for ARIN-2015-3: Remove 30-Day > Utilization Requirement in End-User IPv4 Policy based on strong support in > Montreal. > > Beyond deleting the 25% bullet as the policy says, their are editorial > changes as follows to the remaining text; > > - It looks weird to have single item bullet list, so merge the two remaining > sentence fragments into a single sentence. > - Change "are" to "is", since there is only one remaining criteria > - Use of "criteria" as a singular is common usage, even though technically > it's plural. > - Resulting in "The basic criteria that must be met is a 50% utilization rate > within one year." > > The remaining and resulting text for 4.3.3 is now included in the > policy text, for editorial clarity. The original staff and legal > suggested removing the RFC2050 reference and also pointed out that > 4.2.3.6 also has a 25% immediate use clause and a RFC2050 reference. > > Feedback in Montreal was that deleting the 25% immediate use was a nice > bite-sized change, and we shouldn't try to do more than that with this > change, so those changes are not included at this time. > > Any additional feedback or comments are appreciated. > > Thanks > > --------- > > Draft Policy ARIN-2015-3: Remove 30 day utilization requirement in > end-user IPv4 policy > > Date: 27 January 2015 > > Problem Statement: > > End-user policy is intended to provide end-users with a one year supply of IP > addresses. Qualification for a one-year supply requires the network operator > to utilize at least 25% of the requested addresses within 30 days. This text > is unrealistic and should be removed. > > First, it often takes longer than 30 days to stage equipment and start > actually using the addresses. > > Second, growth is often not that regimented; the forecast is to use X > addresses over the course of a year, not to use 25% of X within 30 days. > > Third, this policy text applies to additional address space requests. It is > incompatible with the requirements of other additional address space request > justification which indicates that 80% utilization of existing space is > sufficient to justify new space. If a block is at 80%, then often (almost > always?) the remaining 80% will be used over the next 30 days and longer. > Therefore the operator cannot honestly state they will use 25% of the > ADDITIONAL space within 30 days of receiving it; they're still trying to use > their older block efficiently. > > Fourth, in the face of ARIN exhaustion, some ISPs are starting to not give > out /24 (or larger) blocks. So the justification for the 25% rule that > previously existed (and in fact, applied for many years) is no longer germane. > > Policy statement: > > Remove the 25% utilization criteria bullet point from NRPM 4.3.3. > > Resulting text: > > 4.3.3. Utilization rate > > Utilization rate of address space is a key factor in justifying a new > assignment of IP address space. Requesters must show exactly how > previous address assignments have been utilized and must provide > appropriate details to verify their one-year growth projection. > > The basic criteria that must be met is a 50% utilization rate within one year. > > A greater utilization rate may be required based on individual network > requirements. Please refer to RFC 2050 for more information on > utilization guidelines. > > Comments: > a.Timetable for implementation: Immediate b.Anything else > > -- > ================================================ > 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. _______________________________________________ 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. _______________________________________________ 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.
