I am in support of this draft: Remove 30 day utilization requirement in end-user IPv4 policy. RD On Apr 26, 2016 11:48 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. Advisory Council Meeting Results - April 2016 (ARIN) > 2. LAST CALL for Recommended Draft Policy ARIN-2015-3: Remove 30 > day utilization requirement in end-user IPv4 policy (ARIN) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2016 14:38:35 -0400 > From: ARIN <[email protected]> > To: [email protected] > Subject: [arin-ppml] Advisory Council Meeting Results - April 2016 > Message-ID: <[email protected]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed > > In accordance with the ARIN Policy Development Process (PDP), the ARIN > Advisory Council (AC) met on 20 April 2016. > > The AC moved the following to last call (to be posted separately to last > call): > > Draft Policy ARIN-2015-3: Remove 30 day utilization requirement in > end-user IPv4 policy > > The AC abandoned the following: > > Draft Policy ARIN-2015-9: Eliminating needs-based evaluation for > Section 8.2, 8.3, and 8.4 transfers of IPv4 netblocks > > The AC provided the following statement. "The ARIN AC abandoned 2015-9 > because there was insufficient community support to bring the proposal > forward and there did not appear to be any potential changes to the > proposal that were likely to significantly improve the level of support." > > The AC is continuing to work on: > > Draft Policy ARIN-2015-2: Modify 8.4 (Inter-RIR Transfers to > Specified Recipients) > Draft Policy ARIN-2015-7: Simplified requirements for demonstrated > need for IPv4 transfers > Draft Policy ARIN-2016-1: Reserved Pool Transfer Policy > > The AC abandoned 2015-9. Anyone dissatisfied with this decision may > initiate a petition. The deadline to begin a petition will be five > business days after the AC's draft meeting minutes are published. For > more information on starting and participating in petitions, see PDP > Petitions at: > https://www.arin.net/policy/pdp_petitions.html > > Draft Policy and Proposal texts are available at: > https://www.arin.net/policy/proposals/index.html > > The ARIN Policy Development Process can be found at: > https://www.arin.net/policy/pdp.html > > Regards, > > Communications and Member Services > American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN) > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 2 > Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2016 14:38:49 -0400 > From: ARIN <[email protected]> > To: [email protected] > Subject: [arin-ppml] LAST CALL for Recommended Draft Policy > ARIN-2015-3: Remove 30 day utilization requirement in end-user IPv4 > policy > Message-ID: <[email protected]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed > > The ARIN Advisory Council (AC) met on 20 April 2016 and decided to > send the following to last call: > > Recommended Draft Policy ARIN-2015-3: Remove 30 day utilization > requirement in end-user IPv4 policy > > Feedback is encouraged during the last call period. All comments should > be provided to the Public Policy Mailing List. This last call will > expire on 9 May 2016. After last call the AC will conduct their > last call review. > > The draft policy text is below and available at: > https://www.arin.net/policy/proposals/ > > The ARIN Policy Development Process is available at: > https://www.arin.net/policy/pdp.html > > Regards, > > Communications and Member Services > American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN) > > > ## * ## > > > Recommended Draft Policy ARIN-2015-3 > Remove 30 day utilization requirement in end-user IPv4 policy > > AC's assessment of conformance with the Principles of Internet Number > Resource Policy: > > ARIN 2015-3 contributes to fair and impartial number resource > administration by removing from the NRPM text that is operationally > unrealistic for the reasons discussed in the problem statement. This > proposal is technically sound, in that the removal of the text will more > closely align with the way staff applies the existing policy in relation > to 8.3 transfers. There was strong community support for the policy on > PPML and at ARIN 36, which was confirmed at ARIN 37. There was a > suggestion to replace this text with an alternate requirement. However, > the community consensus was to move forward with the removal alone. > > The staff and legal review also suggested removing RFC2050 references > and pointed out that 4.2.3.6 has an additional 25% immediate use clause, > community feedback was to deal with those issues separately. > > 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 criterion 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 > > ##### > > ARIN STAFF ASSESSMENT > > Draft Policy ARIN-2015-3 > Remove 30 day utilization requirement in end-user IPv4 policy > Date of Assessment: 16 February 2016 > > ___ > 1. Summary (Staff Understanding) > > This proposal would remove the 25% utilization (within 30 days of > issuance) criteria bullet point from NRPM 4.3.3. > > ___ > 2. Comments > > A. ARIN Staff Comments > This policy would more closely align with the way staff applies the > existing policy in relation to 8.3 transfers. Because there is no longer > an IPv4 free pool and many IPv4 requests are likely to be satisfied by > 8.3 transfers, the adoption of this policy should have no major impact > on operations and could be implemented as written. > > Note that both NRPM 4.3.3 and NRPM 4.2.3.6 contain references to > obsolete RFC 2050. Additionally, 4.2.3.6 references the 25% immediate > use (within 30 days of issuance) requirement. > > Staff suggests removing the first two sentences of 4.2.3.6 to remove the > references to RFC 2050 and the 25% requirement. Additionally, staff > suggests removing the reference to the obsolete RFC 2050 in section 4.3.3. > > B. ARIN General Counsel ? Legal Assessment > No material legal risk in this policy. > > ___ > 3. Resource Impact > > This policy would have minimal resource impact from an implementation > aspect. It is estimated that implementation would occur immediately > after ratification by the ARIN Board of Trustees. The following would be > needed in order to implement: > * Updated guidelines and internal procedures > * Staff training > > > ------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > ARIN-PPML mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml > > End of ARIN-PPML Digest, Vol 130, Issue 34 > ****************************************** >
_______________________________________________ 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.
