""If you have an example containing private information, feel free to send it to me off-list and I'll anonymize it for the group."" All please note we will not be taking anything off PPML list. Everything needs to be tracked via PPML or our public meetings. If you have any examples it can be posted here and generalized or anonymized.
Kat Hunter AC Chair On Fri, Feb 21, 2025, 8:22 PM Tyler O'Meara via ARIN-PPML < [email protected]> wrote: > Hi Bill, > > I was thinking that both DNS zone operators as well as IXes would qualify > for > the default /24 under either 4.2.2 or 4.3.2. I believe the 50% utilization > rate > under 4.3.3 only applies for allocations larger than that minimum, and I am > comfortable with that being a requirement for anyone requesting more than > a /24 > from the 4.4 pool (though I'm happy to hear if anyone thinks otherwise). > > I can envision both IXes and DNS zone operators having legitimate reasons > to > want multiple /24s despite using less than 50% of the actual IP addresses. > However, all of the use cases I can think of (e.g. one organization running > multiple IXes, each with a distinct peering LAN) would qualify under 4.5 > Multiple Discrete Networks (and in particular, 4.5.7). > > Thanks, > Tyler > > > On Fri, 2025-02-21 at 16:38 -0800, William Herrin wrote: > > On Tue, Feb 18, 2025 at 3:36 PM Tyler O'Meara via ARIN-PPML > > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Under 4.4: > > > > “ARIN will reserve a /15 equivalent of IPv4 address space for > Critical > > > > Internet Infrastructure (CII) within the ARIN RIR service area. > > > > Allocations from this pool will be no smaller than a /24.” > > > > > > > > and later under 4.4.2:, Root and ccTLD Allocations: > > > > “Root and ccTLD operators will provide justification of their need > and > > > > certification of their status as currently active zone operators.” > > > > > > > > - The proposal text (and, to be fair, the text it aims to replace) is > > > > silent on justification criteria for IX allocations larger than a > /24. Our > > > > understanding is that absent explicit guidance, ARIN staff has used > the > > > > justification language in Section 4.2.2 or 4.2.4 to evaluate these > > > > depending on the request type. Should the qualification criteria be > made > > > > explicit in the proposed policy text? Should an alternate > justification > > > > criteria be proposed for larger IX allocations under this section? > > > > > > Rather than adding requirements to 4.4.1 or 4.4.2 I would add the > following > > > (or similar) under 4.4: "Requests under this Section must be justified > under > > > either Section 4.2 or 4.3 in addition to meeting the specific > requirements > > > below". This makes it clear that 4.4 does not exempt a request from > needing > > > to meet the usual ARIN policies, but that it is instead of "add on" > you can > > > use to get access to the reserved pool rather than having to go to the > > > waitlist. > > > > Hi Tyler, > > > > This would have the effect of changing the draft's IXP initial > > requirements from "must have 3 participants not under common control" > > to something along the lines of "must have 128ish participants within > > 24 months." (NRPM 4.3.3) It could similarly obligate the DNS operators > > to employ 128 servers within the /24. > > > > That seems a little challenging to me. What are your thoughts? > > > > Regards, > > Bill Herrin > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > 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.
