Real life may be that larger sizes never come available, but if the
size does come available and an org is next on the list and it can be
justified within ARIN’s normal policies, then it should be assigned
regardless of size. +1 to this comment.
/Steven Ryerse/
/President/
/100 Ashford Center North, Suite 110, Atlanta, GA 30338/
/770.656.1460 - Cell/
/770.399.9099 - Office/
/770.392.0076 - Fax/
Description: Description: Eclipse Networks Logo_small.png℠Eclipse
Networks, Inc.
^ Conquering Complex Networks ^℠ ^
*From:* ARIN-PPML <[email protected]> *On Behalf Of *Tom Pruitt
*Sent:* Monday, May 13, 2019 10:39 AM
*To:* David Farmer <[email protected]>
*Cc:* [email protected]
*Subject:* Re: [arin-ppml] Fwd: Advisory Council Recommendation
Regarding NRPM 4.1.8. Unmet Requests
My biggest objection is limiting of an organization to a specific
size. Although I realize ARIN can change policies, I believe if an
organization has in good faith followed the existing rules and been
put on the waiting list that they should not come away with nothing
especially those that were on the list before the current suspension
began. If those organizations were watching the list, and moving up,
it is likely that they have made business decisions based on that data
with the assumption that they would get an allocation at some point.
I believe the proposed allocation limit is being discussed as a
method to discourage bad actors from receiving address space and then
just holding them in order to sell them at a profit once they are
allowed, but as you stated “the waiting list is primarily a mechanism
to ensure resources are not stuck at ARIN”, that has nothing to do
with the size of an organization requesting resources. I can
support an allocation limit per allocation, and even extending the
time an organization must wait before getting back on the wait list.
That being said, if an organization is willing to wait on the list
until the resources are available then they should get the allocation.
Thanks,
Tom Pruitt
Network Engineer
Stratus Networks
stratus_networks_logo_FINAL
*From:* David Farmer <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>
*Sent:* Friday, May 10, 2019 3:44 PM
*To:* Tom Pruitt <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>
*Cc:* [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
*Subject:* Re: [arin-ppml] Fwd: Advisory Council Recommendation
Regarding NRPM 4.1.8. Unmet Requests
If /20 is too small is their another size you would propose? a /19 or
a /18 maybe? Do you have an argument for why that is the right number?
When the AC looked at this there was strong support for limiting the
size of the organization that could qualify to ensure these resources
went to smaller organizations. But there were varying opinions on what
that size should be, /20 was just the option with the most support
amongst the AC.
This formulation also provides a limit on how many times an
organization can go back to the waiting list, allowing smaller
organizations more times to return to the waiting list, while limiting
lager organization to fewer times to return to the waiting list. And
organizations that already have more than a /20 must go to the market.
A /20 limit, gives a new organization (with no resources) the
opportunity receive up to 5 allocations from the waiting list if they
got a /22 each time.
A /19 limit would allow a new ISP up to 9 allocations if they got a
/22 each time.
A /18 limit would allow a new ISP up to 17 allocations if they got a
/22 each time.
Please realize the waiting list is primarily a mechanism to ensure
resources are not stuck at ARIN, it should not be seen as a reliable
means of obtaining resources.
Thanks
On Fri, May 10, 2019 at 2:45 PM Tom Pruitt <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
I do not support the new text, specifically the limit of a /20
per organization.
The limiting of an organization to an aggregate of a /20 is a huge
hinderance of the ability of a smaller ISP to compete. A smaller
ISP that can win business on service and cost could lose that same
business due to simply recouping the IPv4 costs. Large ISPs will
often give the IPs away to win the business, and it costs them
nothing as they received their IPV4 space for free.
Additionally, many smaller ISPs operate in outlying areas where
IPv6 adoption will likely be slow, which will also hinder their
ability to push IPv6. I’m not sure at what point an
organization becomes “large”, but the smaller organizations are
the ones that will be hurt by this limit.
What happens to organizations that are currently on the wait list
that have an aggregate of a /20 or more? Do they still get a
/22. Some of those organizations have been on the list for over a
year. Assuming they played by the rules and made decisions based
on the assumption that they would get an allotment of IPv4
addresses, denying them any addresses after they have waited a
year or more could be very detrimental to them. These policy
changes and decisions affect the smaller entities greatly, and
they need some clarity.
Thanks,
Tom Pruitt
Network Engineer
Stratus Networks
stratus_networks_logo_FINAL
*From:* ARIN-PPML <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> *On Behalf Of *Andrew Dul
*Sent:* Monday, May 6, 2019 4:09 PM
*To:* [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
*Subject:* [arin-ppml] Fwd: Advisory Council Recommendation
Regarding NRPM 4.1.8. Unmet Requests
Hello,
I'd like to bring your attention to another issue that may have
been lost in the flurry of other emails. We are currently in a 14
day feedback period for the AC's response to the Board's
suspension of the wait-list. Please note the following updated
text for the wait-list. Your comments on this updated text are
welcome.
Thanks,
Andrew
===
If no such block is available, the organization will be provided
the option to be placed on a waiting list of pre-qualified
recipients, listing both the block size, for which the
organization is qualified, which in the case of the waiting list
shall not be larger than a /22, and the smallest block size
acceptable to the organization. An organization may not be added
to the waiting list if it already holds IPv4 resources amounting
in aggregate to more than a /20 of address space. Resources
received via section 4.1.8 may not be transferred within 60 months
of the issuance date.
-------- Forwarded Message --------
*Subject: *
[arin-ppml] Advisory Council Recommendation Regarding NRPM 4.1.8.
Unmet Requests
*Date: *
Mon, 29 Apr 2019 11:16:31 -0400
*From: *
ARIN <[email protected]> <mailto:[email protected]>
*To: *
[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
Subject:
At their 16 January Meeting, the Board of Trustees suspended
issuance of number resources under NRPM section 4.1.8.2.
(Fulfilling Unmet Needs), and referred NRPM section 4.1.8 to the
ARIN Advisory Council for their recommendation.
The Advisory Council has provided its recommendation, and per
ARIN's Policy Development Process, the recommendation is hereby
submitted to the Public Policy Mailing List for a community
discussion period of 14 days, to conclude on 13 May.
Once completed, the Board of Trustees will review the AC’s
recommendation and the PPML discussion.
The full text of the Advisory Council's recommendation is below.
Board of Trustees meeting minutes are available at:
https://www.arin.net/about/welcome/board/meetings/2019_0116/
For more details on the Policy Development Process, visit:
https://www.arin.net/participate/policy/pdp/
Regards,
Sean Hopkins
Policy Analyst
American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN)
Advisory Council recommendation:
In accordance with section 10.2 of the ARIN Policy Development
Process, the ARIN Advisory Council recommends the following
actions to the Board of Trustees in response to the Board’s
suspension of part of the operation of sections 4.1.8, 4.1.8.1 and
4.1.8.2 of the Numbering Resource Policy Manual:
Replace section 4.1.8 as follows, then reinstate the full
operation of sections 4.1.8, 4.1.8.1 and 4.1.8.2 immediately.
4.1.8. Unmet Requests
In the event that ARIN does not have a contiguous block of
addresses of sufficient size to fulfill a qualified request, ARIN
will provide the requesting organization with the option to
specify the smallest block size they’d be willing to accept, equal
to or larger than the applicable minimum size specified elsewhere
in ARIN policy. If such a smaller block is available, ARIN will
fulfill the request with the largest single block available that
fulfills the request.
If no such block is available, the organization will be provided
the option to be placed on a waiting list of pre-qualified
recipients, listing both the block size, for which the
organization is qualified, which in the case of the waiting list
shall not be larger than a /22, and the smallest block size
acceptable to the organization. An organization may not be added
to the waiting list if it already holds IPv4 resources amounting
in aggregate to more than a /20 of address space. Resources
received via section 4.1.8 may not be transferred within 60 months
of the issuance date.
Repeated requests, in a manner that would circumvent 4.1.6, are
not allowed: an organization may only receive one allocation,
assignment, or transfer every 3 months, but ARIN, at its sole
discretion, may waive this requirement if the requester can
document a change in circumstances since their last request that
could not have been reasonably foreseen at the time of the
original request, and which now justifies additional space.
Qualified requesters whose request cannot be immediately met will
also be advised of the availability of the transfer mechanism in
section 8.3 as an alternative mechanism to obtain IPv4 addresses.
_______________________________________________
ARIN-PPML
You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List ([email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>).
Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
Please contact [email protected] <mailto:[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]
<mailto:[email protected]>).
Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
Please contact [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> if you
experience any issues.
--
===============================================
David Farmer Email:[email protected] <mailto: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.
