On Tue, Jan 16, 2018 at 11:04 AM, Jason Schiller <[email protected]> wrote:
> I support the proposal with the exclusion of section 6.5.9.3. > I support the proposal with the inclusion of section 6.5.9.3. > I ask what is the purpose of section 6.5.9.3? > Is section 6.5.9.3 needed? > Is section 6.5.9.3 restricting the right thing? > > Without section 6.5.9.3 the policy clearly defines a community network, > and allows what would otherwise be an LIR getting a /32 (or /36 upon > request) > get instead a /40. > > This would reduce there fees from X-small $1,000 annunally > (or upon request 2X-small $500 annually) > to 3X-small $250 annually. > > Sounds well and good. > > > Section 6.5.9.3 adds a further restriction of there shall be no no > re-allocations, > suggesting they cannot have a user of their space which in turn has its > own users. > > (for the record I think you can drop the text "to other organizations." > and just have "However, they shall not reallocate resources.") > > > What behavior are you intending to prevent? > Section 6.5.9.3 has two parts. The first part says community networks are like other LIRs, they make reassignments to end-users and makes it abundantly clear that section 6.5.4 and 6.5.5 apply to community networks. I don't want anyone arguing that those sections don't apply to community networks. The second part is the restriction on making reallocations. This comes back to a couple of arguments; (A.) If community networks can make reallocations, then there is no difference between them and a regular ISP/LIR, and some participants in earlier discussions were adamant there needed to be a difference between community networks and regular ISPs/LIRs. (B.) From the debate on ARIN-2013-3: Tiny IPv6 Allocations for ISPs, some participants in that discussion were adamant that a /40 was too small of an allocation for an ISP, especially if that ISP was to make any reallocations. Doesn't the definition already have the required limits on behavior in the > form of: > > "A community network is deployed, operated, and governed by its users, > for the purpose of providing free or low-cost connectivity to the > community it services." > > It appears what you are preventing are the cases below. I ask is this > what you > intend to prevent? and if so why? > > Should the Colorado IPv6 cooperative be prevented from providing transit > to the > Rocky Mountain Spotted IPv6 community network because they in turn assign > IPv6 addresses to community members? > > > What if this is all within one community network? What if the Rocky > Mountain > Spotted IPv6 community network has a part of the network that is managed by > a group in Ball Mountain community and another part is managed by a group > in > Mount Lincoln. Wouldn't it make sense to re-allocate some of the Rocky > Mountain > Spotted IPv6 community network's /40 to Ball Mountain community and let > them > handle the assignments to users in their locale? > Personly, I'd be fine with removing the restriction on community networks making reallocations, but I'd still want to have section 6.5.9.3 I'd rewrite is as follows; *6.5.9.3. Reassignments by Community Networks* *Similar to other LIRs, Community Networks shall make reassignments and reallocations in accordance with applicable policies, in particular, but not limited to sections 6.5.4 and 6.5.5. * What do others think should community networks be allowed to make both reassignments and reallocations, or just reassignments? Thanks. -- =============================================== 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.
