I support this proposal as written. James
On Mon, Jun 27, 2016 at 8:24 AM, Chris Spears <[email protected]> wrote: > I support this proposal as written. > > On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 12:13 PM, ARIN <[email protected]> wrote: > > On 16 June 2016 the ARIN Advisory Council (AC) advanced the following > Draft > > Policy to Recommended Draft Policy status: > > > > ARIN-2016-1: Reserved Pool Transfer Policy > > > > The text of the Recommended Draft Policy is below, and may also be found > at: > > https://www.arin.net/policy/proposals/2016_1.html > > > > You are encouraged to discuss all Recommended Draft Policies on PPML > prior > > to their presentation at the next ARIN Public Policy Consultation (PPC). > > PPML and PPC discussions are invaluable to the AC when determining > community > > consensus. > > > > The 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) > > > > Recommended Draft Policy ARIN-2016-1: Reserved Pool Transfer Policy > > > > Date: 21 June 2016 > > > > AC assessment of conformance with the Principles of Internet Number > Resource > > Policy: > > > > This proposal enables fair and impartial number resource administration > by > > ensuring that IPv4 resources, which are specially designated for critical > > infrastructure and IPv6 transition, are readily available for many years > > into the future. This is done by ensuring the resources remain in their > > originally designated pool rather than being moved into the general IPv4 > > address pool via a transfer. This proposal is technically sound and is > > supported by the community. > > > > Problem Statement: > > > > Section 8 of the current NRPM does not distinguish between the transfer > of > > blocks from addresses that have been reserved for specific uses and other > > addresses that can be transferred. In sections 4.4 and 4.10 there are > > specific address blocks set aside, based on the need for critical > > infrastructure and IPv6 transitions. Two issues arise if transfers of > > reserved address space occur under the current language of section 8. > First, > > if transfers of 4.4 or 4.10 space occur under the current policy > > requirements set forth in sections 8.3 and 8.4, the recipients will be > able > > to acquire space that was originally reserved for a specific purpose > without > > ever providing evidence that they will be using the space for either > > critical infrastructure or IPv6 transition. Second, if we allow an > > allocation or assignment from the block reserved in section 4.10 to be > > transferred out of the region, it would complicate the single aggregate > from > > which providers are being asked to allow in block sizes smaller than a > /24. > > This policy would limit the transfer of addresses from reserved pools. > > > > Policy statement: > > > > Add to Section 8.3 and Section 8.4 under the "Conditions on source of the > > transfer:" > > > > Address resources from a reserved pool (including those designated in > > Section 4.4 and 4.10) are not eligible for transfer. > > > > Timetable for implementation: Immediate > > > > ########## > > > > ARIN STAFF & LEGAL ASSESSMENT > > Draft Policy ARIN-2016-1 > > RESERVED POOL TRANSFER POLICY > > https://www.arin.net/policy/proposals/2016_1.html > > > > Date of Assessment: 13 June 2016 > > ___ > > 1. Summary (Staff Understanding) > > > > This policy would make IPv4 addresses issued under NRPM 4.4 and 4.10 > > ineligible for transfer inside the NRPM 8.3 and 8.4 transfer policies. > > ___ > > 2. Comments > > > > A. ARIN Staff Comments > > > > * If this policy is implemented, ARIN staff would not allow NRPM 8.3 and > 8.4 > > transfers to include IPv4 addresses previously issued under NRPM 4.4 and > > 4.10 policies. > > > > * ARIN staff would continue to allow IPv4 addresses previously issued > under > > NRPM 4.4 and 4.10 to be included in Merger and Acquisition (NRPM 8.2) > > transfers. > > > > * This policy could be implemented as written. > > > > B. ARIN General Counsel – Legal Assessment > > > > The policy does not create a material legal issue. It should be noted > that > > ARIN does permit transfers of IPV4 resources pursuant to 8.3 and 8.4. > This > > policy is an exception to that transferability and is consistent with the > > intent and of the policy by which these allocations were made. > > ___ > > 3. Resource Impact > > > > Implementation of this policy would have minimal resource impact. It is > > estimated that implementation would occur within 3 months after > ratification > > by the ARIN Board of Trustees. The following would be needed in order to > > implement: > > > > * Updated guidelines and internal procedures > > > > * Staff training > > ___ > > 4. Proposal / Draft Policy Text Assessed > > > > Draft Policy ARIN-2016-1 > > Reserved Pool Transfer Policy > > > > Date: 22 March 2016 > > > > Problem Statement: > > > > Section 8 of the current NRPM does not distinguish between the transfer > of > > blocks from addresses that have been reserved for specific uses and other > > addresses that can be transferred. In sections 4.4 and 4.10 there are > > specific address blocks set aside, based on the need for critical > > infrastructure and IPv6 transitions. Two issues arise if transfers of > > reserved address space occur under the current language of section 8. > First, > > if transfers of 4.4 or 4.10 space occur under the current policy > > requirements set forth in sections 8.3 and 8.4, the recipients will be > able > > to acquire space that was originally reserved for a specific purpose > without > > ever providing evidence that they will be using the space for either > > critical infrastructure or IPv6 transition. Second, if we allow an > > allocation or assignment from the block reserved in section 4.10 to be > > transferred out of the region, it would complicate the single aggregate > from > > which providers are being asked to allow in block sizes smaller than a > /24. > > This policy would limit the transfer of addresses from reserved pools. > > > > Policy statement: > > > > Add to Section 8.3 and Section 8.4 under the "Conditions on source of the > > transfer:" > > > > Address resources from a reserved pool (including those designated in > > Section 4.4 and 4.10) are not eligible for transfer. > > > > Timetable for implementation: Immediate > > _______________________________________________ > > 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.
