Good question David, but I don't think that is too hard.
If an organization (a legal entity) has any IPv4 blocks assigned to it,
regardless of the usage it would not be eligible already and that
eliminates the vast majority of cases which sounds good. Any
common-traditional new company that has entered into the Internet
industry to connect people or provide any type of hosting/cloud
services. Of course that would be questions around new companies that
belong to the same economic group of another one who has IPv4 space and
that needs to be worked out properly.
Sometimes when we discuss proposals here I feel that sometimes is wished
to foresee absolutely every possible scenario and that is not always
possible but it is still a big gain from preventing most of unfair or
unnecessary situations.
I almost agree that the 60-month restriction is already good to function
as indefinite in practice, but a improvement to the mentioned proposal
is that it makes impossible to transfer that space received from the
waiting list to any other organization and forces it to be returned to
ARIN that has the ability to better and more neutral and fairly assign
it to someone else in the future when the situation worse.
Finally the size of the block received should stay at maximum of /22. As
mentioned reducing it would make it useless for most cases, contributes
even more to increase the size of the routing tables faster, makes it
nearly impossible to do any proper traffic engineering in some
situations and it allows these newcomers to come to a minimum size where
they can reach cruising speed that they can have financial capability to
decide for a necessary transfer or invest in technology that makes
better usages of that fewer space they have.
Fernando Frediani
On 14/11/2022 20:35, David Farmer wrote:
Conceptually, as an abstract idea, I have no problem with restricting
the waiting list to newcomers only. However, the implementation of
such a restriction could prove problematic; What is a true newcomer?
How do we prevent gaming of this restriction?
The current 60-month restriction on transfers is already functionally
indefinite, at least in my option.
Finally, the waiting list was never intended as a viable option to
meet a network's need for resources; its purpose in policy is to
ensure ARIN has a mechanism to distribute any IPv4 resources that are
reclaimed or otherwise become available to ARIN.
Thanks.
On Mon, Nov 14, 2022 at 5:09 PM Fernando Frediani
<[email protected]> wrote:
Then need to detail and analyze what sound unreasonable in
changing 5 years period to indefinite.
Reducing the request size to anything smaller than an /22 is
giving a such small and useless space that will probably make no
difference to whoever receives it. A /22 is already a very small
amount (almost symbolic) but at least gives the ability to a newer
organizations to work with something, get into the market,
innovate, reach some proper size and then invest in different
technologies to make better usage of few IPv4 and deploy IPv6
properly in order to keep existing in the market. Plus giving out
/24-only to organizations in the waiting list would contribute
even more to increase the size of the routing table with very
little gain.
A change in the waiting-list rules that would be certainly be
welcome is restrict it only to newcomers that have no IPv4 space
at all. Those who already have had already enough time to learn
live with what they have and organize themselves to either do IPv4
transfers and deploy IPv6 in order to reduce its dependency
whenever possible.
Fernando
On 14/11/2022 19:53, David Farmer via ARIN-PPML wrote:
I reviewed the Policy Implementation and Experience Report
presented at ARIN 50;
https://www.arin.net/participate/meetings/ARIN50/materials/1020_policyimplementation.pdf
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RruDSG32D0M&list=PL726kQ53RX6i-x05T2JLckh59gWtLs1TR&t=5569s
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RruDSG32D0M&list=PL726kQ53RX6i-x05T2JLckh59gWtLs1TR&t=5569s>
https://www.arin.net/participate/meetings/ARIN50/day1_transcript/#policy-implementation-and-experience-report
I don't support any changes to the transfer provisions of the
waiting list. The current transfer provisions seem reasonable to me.
However, if I were going to support any changes to the waiting
list, I would support reducing the request size from /22 to /24.
Thanks.
On Mon, Nov 14, 2022 at 3:42 PM WOOD Alison * DAS
<[email protected]> wrote:
Hello!
The Policy Experience Report Working Group has been working
on the Policy Experience Report from ARIN 50. I would
appreciate your feedback on the following issue regarding
transferring waitlist space.
The current wait list criteria is:
* Must have a /20 or less in total IPv4 holdings.
* May request up to a /22.
* Removed from list if IPv4 received via 8.3/8.4 transfer.
* Received ip space is eligible for needs-based transfer
after five years.
The Policy Experience Working Group would like your feedback
on a potential policy that would restrict the transfer of IP
space that has been obtained from the waiting list. In other
words, any IP address space received from the waiting list
would be ineligible for transfer indefinitely and encouraged
to be returned to ARIN if not in use. This policy would be
specific to transfers and not M & A’s.
The working group appreciates your feedback.
Thank you!
_______________________________________________
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] <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 [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.
--
===============================================
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.
