Unless there are additional comments or suggestions, I plan to propose this Policy is advanced to Recommended Draft Policy at the AC's February meeting.
Thanks On Wed, Jan 24, 2018 at 7:46 AM, ARIN <[email protected]> wrote: > The following has been revised and re-titled: > > * Draft Policy ARIN-2017-8: Amend Community Networks > > Revised text is below and can be found at: > https://www.arin.net/policy/proposals/2017_8.html > > You are encouraged to discuss all Draft Policies on PPML. The AC will > evaluate the discussion in order to assess the conformance of this draft > policy with ARIN's Principles of Internet number resource policy as stated > in the Policy Development Process (PDP). Specifically, these principles are: > > * Enabling Fair and Impartial Number Resource Administration > * Technically Sound > * Supported by the Community > > 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, > > Sean Hopkins > Policy Analyst > American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN) > > > > > > Draft Policy ARIN-2017-8: Amend Community Networks > > Problem Statement: > > The Community Networks section of the NRPM has only been used once since > implementation in January 2010. Proposal ARIN-2016-7, to increase the > number of use cases, was abandoned by the Advisory Council due to lack of > feedback. Proposal ARIN 2017-2, to remove all mention of community networks > from NRPM met with opposition by the community. Many responded that the > definition of "community network" was too narrow, which could be the reason > for lack of uptake. > > In the discussion at ARIN 40, it was clear that more than just the > definition of a community network needed revision and that community > networks need to have allocations, not assignments. Additionally, community > networks need to make reassignments to end-users in accordance with > applicable policies. > > Policy statement: > > Replace section 2.11 with the following; > > 2.11 Community Network > > 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. Users of the network or other volunteers must play a primary role > in the governance of the organization, whereas other functions may be > handled by either paid staff or volunteers. > > Rename section 6.5.9 and revise the last sentence as follows; > > 6.5.9. Community Network Allocations > > While community networks would normally be considered to be ISP type > organizations under existing ARIN criteria, they tend to operate on much > tighter budgets and often depend on volunteer labor. As a result, they tend > to be much smaller and more communal in their organization rather than > provider/customer relationships of commercial ISPs. This section seeks to > provide a policy that is more friendly to those environments by allowing > community network to receive a smaller allocation than other LIRs or > commercial ISPs. > > Community networks may also qualify under section 6.5.2 as a regular LIR. > > Section 6.5.9.1 is not changing, but is included here for completeness; > > 6.5.9.1. Qualification Criteria > > To qualify under this section, a community network must demonstrate to > ARIN's satisfaction that it meets the definition of a community network > under section 2.11 of the NRPM. > > Replace section 6.5.9.2 and 6.5.9.3 with the following; > > 6.5.9.2. Allocation Size > > Community networks are eligible only to receive an allocation of /40 of > IPv6 resources under this section. Community networks that wish to receive > a larger initial allocation or any subsequent allocations must qualify as a > regular LIR, see sections 6.5.2 or 6.5.3 respectively. > > 6.5.9.3. Reassignments by Community Networks > > Similar to other LIRs, Community networks shall make reassignments to > end-users in accordance with applicable policies, in particular, but not > limited to sections 6.5.4 and 6.5.5. However, they shall not reallocate > resources under this section. > > Comments: > > Timetable for implementation: Immediate > > Anything Else: > > The rationale for restricting community networks that receive resources > through this policy from making reallocations is that a /40 is a tiny IPv6 > allocation and it does not seem reasonable to subdivide such a small > allocation into even smaller reallocations. > > Also, the recommended size for reassignment is /48, to even the smallest > end-users, and therefore a /40 only provides 256 such reassignments. > > If a community network needs to make reallocations, maybe to other > cooperating community networks in their area, they should apply as, or > become, a regular LIR. As the smallest regular LIR, they would get a /36, > allowing more than sufficient room to subdivide the allocation into several > reasonable sized reallocations as necessary. > _______________________________________________ > 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.
