Support as proposed. -C
> On Oct 26, 2016, at 2:17 PM, ARIN <[email protected]> wrote: > > The ARIN Advisory Council (AC) met on 21 October 2016 and decided to send > Recommended Draft Policy ARIN-2016-4: Transfers for new entrants to Last Call: > > The AC provided the following statement to the community: > > This proposal is technically sound and enables fair and impartial number > policy. There is support for this policy in the ARIN community as expressed > at ARIN 38 and on PPML. There has been no opposition stated to 2016-4. At the > ARIN AC meeting held on 10/21/2016, it was agreed that in the "Anything else" > section of Recommended Draft Policy 2016-4 stating that 'The text in 4.2.2 > “for specified transfers, or three months otherwise” and the text in 4.3.3 > “for specified transfers, or 12 months otherwise” should be stricken if > ARIN-prop-227 is adopted' should be followed by ARIN staff as an instruction > from the AC, presuming that 2016-2 (which is what ARIN-prop-227 has become) > continues to move forward after last call. > > 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 > November 2016. After Last Call, the AC will conduct their Last Call review. > > The full 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) > > > > > ARIN-2016-4: Transfers for new entrants > > AC assessment of conformance with the Principles of Internet Number Resource > Policy: > > The proposal is technically sound and enables fair and impartial number > policy by ensuring that new organizations have a mechanism to access at least > a minimum amount of resources from the transfer market. The staff and legal > review (as updated 8/19/2016) is non-controversial. There is support and no > concerns have been raised by the community regarding the proposal on PPML or > elsewhere. > > Problem Statement: > > New organizations without existing IPv4 space may not always be able to > qualify for an initial allocation under NRPM 4.2, particularly if they are > categorized as ISPs and subject to 4.2.2.1.1. Use of /24. Now that ARIN’s > free pool is exhausted, 4.2.1.6. Immediate need states that “These cases are > exceptional”, but that is no longer correct. End user organizations requiring > less a /24 of address space may also be unable to acquire space from their > upstream ISP, and may instead need to receive a /24 from ARIN via transfer. > > Policy statement: > > Replace Section 4.2.2 with: > > 4.2.2. Initial allocation to ISPs > > “All ISP organizations without direct assignments or allocations from ARIN > qualify for an initial allocation of up to a /21, subject to ARIN’s minimum > allocation size. Organizations may qualify for a larger initial allocation by > documenting how the requested allocation will be utilized within 24 months > for specified transfers, or three months otherwise. ISPs renumbering out of > their previous address space will be given a reasonable amount of time to do > so, and any blocks they are returning will not count against their > utilization. > > Replace Section 4.3.2 to read: > > 4.3.2 Minimum assignment > > ARIN’s minimum assignment for end-user organizations is a /24. > > End-user organizations without direct assignments or allocations from ARIN > qualify for an initial assignment of ARIN’s minimum assignment size. > > Replace the first two sentences of Section 4.3.3. Utilization rate to read: > > Organizations may qualify for a larger initial allocation by providing > appropriate details to verify their 24-month growth projection for specified > transfers, or 12 months otherwise. > > Resulting new section 4.3.3 will be: > > Organizations may qualify for a larger initial allocation, by providing > appropriate details to verify their 24-month growth projection for specified > transfers, or 12 months otherwise. > > 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. > > Comments: > > Timetable for implementation: Immediate > > Anything else > > The text in 4.2.2 “for specified transfers, or three months otherwise” and > the text in 4.3.3 “for specified transfers, or 12 months otherwise” should be > stricken if ARIN-prop-227 is adopted. > _______________________________________________ > 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.
