While students and employees shouldn’t be considered temporary in nature, generally speaking the assignment of addresses to their devices is a different matter and is (for most situations) temporary in nature.
Owen > On May 14, 2018, at 00:17, David Farmer <[email protected]> wrote: > > Students in the case of a University or other school, or staff/employees in > the case of most organizations shouldn't be considered "temporary", how about > "ancillary". On the other hand guest or customers of an organizations > "temporary" seems an appropriate description and a timeframe of day or weeks > also seems appropriate. > >> On Fri, May 11, 2018 at 10:00 AM, Owen DeLong <[email protected]> wrote: >> I disagree. >> >> For example, since a university student is one of the examples cited and is >> entirely appropriate, I would argue that even though the student may have >> the same address assigned persistently to a desktop computer in a dorm room >> for months or even years, I believe it is still within policy intent. As >> such, I believe that “temporary” without clarification as to definite time >> period is more appropriate. >> >> Does this open up some abuse possibilities and loop-holes? Sure. It does, >> but so do many of our other policies. In general we’ve decided that >> benefiting the community and creating policy with a clear intent for people >> of good will to follow is superior to attempting to address every corner >> case and close every loophole. I see no reason not to follow that modus >> operandi here. >> >> Owen >> >> >>> On May 11, 2018, at 7:14 AM, David Farmer <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> I'd suggest "temporary, in a timeframe of days or weeks," is what we should >>> say. In my mind, implying something like 90 days would probably be >>> approaching an outer limit, and many months or a year exceeds the policy >>> intent we have. That said, I don't think there is a good reason for a >>> bright line within the policy either. >>> >>> Thanks. >>> >>>> On Fri, May 11, 2018 at 4:31 AM, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via ARIN-PPML >>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> We don’t care if temporary is taken as “hours, minutes, days, months or >>>> years”? >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> When we have the examples as “students, employees, etc.”, I think it is >>>> clear the intent but removing them we are missing this piece, unless the >>>> staff interprets the policy manual looking at the original “complete” >>>> justification text of the policy proposal. However, that has the >>>> disadvantage that the community (a newcomer) it not recalling the >>>> background of the policy proposal, that’s why I was using the examples in >>>> my original text. >>>> >>>> >>>> Regards, >>>> >>>> Jordi >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> De: Owen DeLong <[email protected]> >>>> Fecha: jueves, 10 de mayo de 2018, 17:19 >>>> Para: JORDI PALET MARTINEZ <[email protected]> >>>> CC: <[email protected]> >>>> Asunto: Re: [arin-ppml] Draft Policy ARIN-2018-4: Clarification on IPv6 >>>> Sub-Assignments >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> I think the best word would be temporary. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> As you have said, it denotes a connection which is transient in nature. >>>> You come, you get an address while you’re connected, then you leave. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> This is temporary. Even if you’re there for several days (as in a hotel >>>> guest network), it’s still temporary in nature. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Owen >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On May 10, 2018, at 8:29 AM, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via ARIN-PPML >>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> I don’t think that will help, on the contrary … you can use both static or >>>> dynamic mechanism for both temporary and non-temporary assignments. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> What I think it was clear is the differentiation between a “permanent >>>> broadband service” and a temporary service (you come to your workplace and >>>> get connectivity while you’re there, same if you are a “guest visitor”). >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> So it still looks to me that “non-permanently” is more obvious? Maybe >>>> “non-continuously”? >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Regards, >>>> >>>> Jordi >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> De: Chris Woodfield <[email protected]> >>>> Fecha: jueves, 10 de mayo de 2018, 15:19 >>>> Para: JORDI PALET MARTINEZ <[email protected]> >>>> CC: <[email protected]> >>>> Asunto: Re: [arin-ppml] Draft Policy ARIN-2018-4: Clarification on IPv6 >>>> Sub-Assignments >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> The two terms, from my reading, are synonymous but carry different >>>> implications, with the term “non-permanently” implying a longer period of >>>> time than “temporarily". In practice, It will most likely be a distinction >>>> built into how addresses are assigned by the organization (i.e. static or >>>> dynamic assignment); would using that as our distinction be a useful >>>> avenue to explore? >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -C >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On May 10, 2018, at 8:07 AM, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ >>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> When I first used “temporarily” in a preliminary version of the proposal, >>>> I was argued that it is not clear then if it is “minutes, hours, days, …”, >>>> so non-permanently, looks like clearer in that sense … It may be a matter >>>> of not being native English speaker. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Regards, >>>> >>>> Jordi >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> De: ARIN-PPML <[email protected]> en nombre de John Santos >>>> <[email protected]> >>>> Fecha: jueves, 10 de mayo de 2018, 15:01 >>>> Para: <[email protected]> >>>> Asunto: Re: [arin-ppml] Draft Policy ARIN-2018-4: Clarification on IPv6 >>>> Sub-Assignments >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> I find the word "temporarily" even more obvious than "non-permanently". >>>> If those two words don't mean the same thing, then we definitely need a >>>> definition. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On 5/10/2018 5:08 AM, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ wrote: >>>> >>>> What will be your opinion if I amend this proposal, so it works for both >>>> IPv4 and IPv6, having this text in section 2.5 (Allocate and Assign), make >>>> it shorter and more generic: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> “A unique IPv4 or IPv6 address or a unique IPv6 /64 prefix, which is >>>> non-permanently provided to third parties, shall not be considered an >>>> assignment” >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Alternatively, if we don’t want to go so far as to define the “size”: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> “An IPv4 or IPv6 block of address, which is non-permanently provided to >>>> third parties, shall not be considered an assignment” >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> I didn’t found short-term defined in the NRPM. Do you still think we need >>>> to define “permanently” ? I think saying non-permanently it is quite >>>> obvious, but maybe folks disagree … >>>> >>>> >>>> Regards, >>>> >>>> Jordi >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> De: ARIN-PPML <[email protected]> en nombre de Jo Rhett >>>> <[email protected]> >>>> Fecha: miércoles, 9 de mayo de 2018, 20:37 >>>> Para: <[email protected]> >>>> CC: <[email protected]> >>>> Asunto: Re: [arin-ppml] Draft Policy ARIN-2018-4: Clarification on IPv6 >>>> Sub-Assignments >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> "Nominative, verb indirect" isn't English ;) Clean english structure would >>>> be: >>>> >>>> "A unique address or a unique /64 prefix that is non-permanently provided >>>> to third parties shall not be considered an assignment. " >>>> >>>> >>>> Or if you really want a descriptive phrase that modifies the nominative >>>> you can get commas like so: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> "A unique address or a unique /64 prefix, which is non-permanently >>>> provided to third parties, shall not be considered an assignment." >>>> >>>> I would also argue that this phrase is very vague unless "permanently" is >>>> defined elsewhere in the document. Wasn't there some phrasing around >>>> short-term assignment? (sorry, too busy/too lazy to grab the entire doc >>>> right now) >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 6:40 PM Andrew Dul <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>> I'd like to suggest that the proposed policy text be shorted and >>>> clarified. I don't believe all the examples are necessary in the >>>> definition section. >>>> >>>> Add to the end of NRPM Section 2.5 - >>>> https://www.arin.net/policy/nrpm.html#two5 >>>> >>>> Current draft text: >>>> >>>> The fact that a unique address or even a unique /64 prefix is >>>> non-permanently provided to third parties, on a link operated by the >>>> original receiver of the assignment, shall not be considered a >>>> sub-assignment. This includes, for example, guests or employees (devices >>>> or servers), hotspots, and point-to-point links or VPNs. The provision of >>>> addressing for permanent connectivity or broadband services is still >>>> considered a sub-assignment. Only the addressing of the point-to-point >>>> link itself can be permanent and that addressing can't be used (neither >>>> directly or indirectly) for the actual communication. >>>> >>>> My suggested rewrite: >>>> >>>> A unique address or a unique /64 prefix that is non-permanently provided >>>> to third parties, shall not be considered an assignment. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On 4/24/2018 11:57 AM, David Farmer wrote: >>>> >>>> I note that the text in question is the subject of an editorial change >>>> that the AC has recently forwarded to Board for review, at a minimum the >>>> policy text need to be updated to account for this editorial change. >>>> Further, I do not support the text as written. >>>> >>>> I support a change to section 2 that is not quite so IPv6 specific and >>>> focused more on the idea that providing hotspot, guest access, or other >>>> such temporary access does not necessitate the making of re-assignments >>>> from a policy perspective. Furthermore, such uses are not in conflict >>>> with the conditions of an assignment (made by ARIN) or re-assignment (made >>>> by an ISP or LIR). Also, If the details of RFC8273 need to be mentioned at >>>> all, they should be someplace in section 6, not in section 2, the >>>> definitions of assign, allocate, re-assign and re-allocate should remain >>>> agnostic about IP version. >>>> >>>> Thanks. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Mon, Apr 23, 2018 at 2:22 PM, ARIN <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>> On 18 April 2018 the ARIN Advisory Council (AC) accepted "ARIN-prop-254: >>>> Clarification on IPv6 Sub-Assignments" as a Draft Policy. >>>> >>>> Draft Policy ARIN-2018-4 is below and can be found at: >>>> https://www.arin.net/policy/proposals/2018_4.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-2018-4: Clarification on IPv6 Sub-Assignments >>>> >>>> Problem Statement: >>>> >>>> When the policy was drafted, the concept of assignments/sub-assignments >>>> did not consider a practice very common in IPv4 which is replicated and >>>> even amplified in IPv6: the use of IP addresses for point-to-point links >>>> or VPNs. >>>> >>>> In the case of IPv6, instead of unique addresses, the use of unique >>>> prefixes (/64) is increasingly common. >>>> >>>> Likewise, the policy failed to consider the use of IP addresses in >>>> hotspots, or the use of IP addresses by guests or employees in Bring Your >>>> Own Device (BYOD) and many other similar cases. >>>> >>>> Finally, the IETF has recently approved the use of a unique /64 prefix per >>>> interface/host (RFC8273) instead of a unique address. This, for example, >>>> allows users to connect to a hotspot, receive a /64 such that they are >>>> “isolated” from other users (for reasons of security, regulatory >>>> requirements, etc.) and they can also use multiple virtual machines on >>>> their devices with a unique address for each one (within the same /64). >>>> >>>> Section 2.5 (Definitions/Allocate and Assign), explicitly prohibits such >>>> assignments, stating that “Assignments... are not to be sub-assigned to >>>> other parties”. >>>> >>>> This proposal clarifies this situation in this regard and better define >>>> the concept, particularly considering new uses of IPv6 (RFC8273), by means >>>> of a new paragraph. >>>> >>>> 5. Policy Statement >>>> >>>> Actual Text >>>> >>>> • Assign - To assign means to delegate address space to an ISP or >>>> end-user, for specific use within the Internet infrastructure they >>>> operate. Assignments must only be made for specific purposes documented by >>>> specific organizations and are not to be sub-assigned to other parties. >>>> >>>> New Text >>>> >>>> • Assign - To assign means to delegate address space to an ISP or >>>> end-user, for specific use within the Internet infrastructure they >>>> operate. Assignments must only be made for specific purposes documented by >>>> specific organizations and are not to be sub-assigned to other parties. >>>> >>>> The fact that a unique address or even a unique /64 prefix is >>>> non-permanently provided to third parties, on a link operated by the >>>> original receiver of the assignment, shall not be considered a >>>> sub-assignment. This includes, for example, guests or employees (devices >>>> or servers), hotspots, and point-to-point links or VPNs. The provision of >>>> addressing for permanent connectivity or broadband services is still >>>> considered a sub-assignment. Only the addressing of the point-to-point >>>> link itself can be permanent and that addressing can't be used (neither >>>> directly or indirectly) for the actual communication. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> 6. Comments >>>> >>>> a. Timetable for implementation: >>>> >>>> Immediate >>>> >>>> b. Anything else: >>>> >>>> Situation in other regions: This situation, has already been corrected in >>>> RIPE, and the policy was updated in a similar way, even if right now there >>>> is a small discrepancy between the policy text that reached consensus and >>>> the RIPE NCC Impact Analysis. A new policy proposal has been submitted to >>>> amend that, and the text is the same as presented by this proposal at >>>> ARIN. Same text has also been submitted to AfriNIC, LACNIC and APNIC. >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> 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. >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> ARIN-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: >>>> https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml >>>> Please contact [email protected] if you experience any issues. >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ ARIN-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: >>>> https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml Please contact >>>> [email protected] if you experience any issues. >>>> >>>> >>>> ********************************************** >>>> IPv4 is over >>>> Are you ready for the new Internet ? >>>> http://www.consulintel.es >>>> The IPv6 Company >>>> >>>> This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or >>>> confidential. The information is intended to be for the exclusive use of >>>> the individual(s) named above and further non-explicilty authorized >>>> disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this >>>> information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly >>>> prohibited and will be considered a criminal offense. If you are not the >>>> intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or >>>> use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including >>>> attached files, is strictly prohibited, will be considered a criminal >>>> offense, so you must reply to the original sender to inform about this >>>> communication and delete it. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> ARIN-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: >>>> https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml >>>> Please contact [email protected] if you experience any issues. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> John Santos >>>> Evans Griffiths & Hart, Inc. >>>> 781-861-0670 ext 539 >>>> _______________________________________________ ARIN-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: >>>> https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml Please contact >>>> [email protected] if you experience any issues. >>>> >>>> >>>> ********************************************** >>>> IPv4 is over >>>> Are you ready for the new Internet ? >>>> http://www.consulintel.es >>>> The IPv6 Company >>>> >>>> This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or >>>> confidential. The information is intended to be for the exclusive use of >>>> the individual(s) named above and further non-explicilty authorized >>>> disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this >>>> information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly >>>> prohibited and will be considered a criminal offense. If you are not the >>>> intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or >>>> use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including >>>> attached files, is strictly prohibited, will be considered a criminal >>>> offense, so you must reply to the original sender to inform about this >>>> communication and delete it. >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> ARIN-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: >>>> https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml >>>> Please contact [email protected] if you experience any issues. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> ********************************************** >>>> IPv4 is over >>>> Are you ready for the new Internet ? >>>> http://www.consulintel.es >>>> The IPv6 Company >>>> >>>> This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or >>>> confidential. The information is intended to be for the exclusive use of >>>> the individual(s) named above and further non-explicilty authorized >>>> disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this >>>> information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly >>>> prohibited and will be considered a criminal offense. If you are not the >>>> intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or >>>> use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including >>>> attached files, is strictly prohibited, will be considered a criminal >>>> offense, so you must reply to the original sender to inform about this >>>> communication and delete it. >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> ARIN-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: >>>> https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml >>>> Please contact [email protected] if you experience any issues. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> ********************************************** >>>> IPv4 is over >>>> Are you ready for the new Internet ? >>>> http://www.consulintel.es >>>> The IPv6 Company >>>> >>>> This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or >>>> confidential. The information is intended to be for the exclusive use of >>>> the individual(s) named above and further non-explicilty authorized >>>> disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this >>>> information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly >>>> prohibited and will be considered a criminal offense. If you are not the >>>> intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or >>>> use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including >>>> attached files, is strictly prohibited, will be considered a criminal >>>> offense, so you must reply to the original sender to inform about this >>>> communication and delete it. >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> ARIN-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: >>>> https://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 >>> =============================================== >>> _______________________________________________ >>> ARIN-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: >>> https://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 > ===============================================
_______________________________________________ ARIN-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: https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml Please contact [email protected] if you experience any issues.
