I support as written. -- Brian Jones On May 5, 2016 11:45 AM, "David Farmer" <[email protected]> wrote:
> As shepherd for this policy I welcome any additional last call > feedback for this policy. It is especially important to speak up if > you feel there are any issues remaining that need to be considered. > But, even if you simply support the policy as written that is > important and useful feedback as well. > > The last call period formally continues through, Monday, May 9th, and > the AC will consider the feedback during its scheduled call on > Thursday, May 19th. > > Thanks > > On Mon, Apr 25, 2016 at 1:38 PM, ARIN <[email protected]> wrote: > > 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 > > _______________________________________________ > > 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. > > > > -- > =============================================== > David Farmer Email:[email protected] > Networking & Telecommunication Services > Office of Information Technology > University of Minnesota > 2218 University Ave SE Phone: 612-626-0815 > Minneapolis, MN 55414-3029 Cell: 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.
