> On Aug 3, 2021, at 05:56 , John Curran <[email protected]> wrote: > > NANOGers - > > The following process change is being proposed in order to simplify customer > request tickers for new number resources and improve overall service. > > If you have strong feelings one way or the other, thenplease join the > arin-consult list and make them known. (Note - the arin-consult mailing list > is open to all in accordance with ARIN’s Mailing List AUP and Standards of > Behavior.) > > Thanks! > /John > > John Curran > President and CEO > American Registry for Internet Numbers > >> Begin forwarded message: >> >> From: ARIN <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> >> Subject: [ARIN-consult] Consultation on Retiring the Officer Attestation >> Requirement >> Date: 3 August 2021 at 8:13:53 AM EDT >> To: <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> >> >> ARIN regularly reviews existing processes as part of our continual >> improvement efforts to be more responsive and improve the service our >> customers receive from ARIN. Recently ARIN reviewed the Officer Attestation >> process and as a result of that review have determined the Officer >> Attestation process is no longer necessary for achievement of its original >> goals and should be retired. The purpose of this consultation is to review >> this proposed change with the community prior to its implementation. >> >> The Officer Attestation was introduced in 2007 in preparation for the >> depletion of IPv4 addresses. Currently, ARIN requires an Officer Attestation >> for all requests that involve a needs analysis (which today consist of >> waiting list requests, NRPM 4.4 micro-allocations, NRPM 4.10 IPv6 >> transition, IPv6 requests, and transfer recipient requests.) >> >> However, conditions have changed since this requirement was established, and >> ARIN believes that the Officer Attestation for resource request tickets is >> no longer necessary for the following reasons: >> >> - Today IPv4 resources are issued by ARIN predominantly via the Waitlist >> policy, and this policy has been revised to only allow one small request per >> party (thus avoiding the original risk of “hoarding” via large suspect >> requests prior to runout).
Correct me if I am wrong, John, but I believe this is one small request per party at a time, not for all time. (e.g. unlike APNIC’s original final /22 per member policy for their last /8, ARIN does allow an organization to apply to the waitlist, receive addresses, then upon utilization of those addresses apply to the waitlist again). >> - With regard to transfers of IPv4 resources obtained via the transfer >> market, the inherent costs for large transfers ensures organizational >> officers are “in the know”. >> - Given IPv6 availability, officer attestation of need for IPv6 resources is >> not necessary. Interesting reversal. I argued when officer attestation was first introduced that applying it to IPv6 was silly and you were among those expressing skepticism. What brings about this change of heart? IPv6 is certainly no more plentiful today than it was back then. >> The review identified that at this point in time the Officer Attestation >> process is problematic for many customers, predominantly posing an >> administrative burden that does not materially improve policy implementation >> and resulting in numerous complaints and adding unnecessary delay (varying >> between two days and an entire week) to completion of resource request >> tickets. It’s a small administrative burden, but despite processing requests for many clients of a variety of sizes and assisting many other clients of significant size in handling their own requests, I have not encountered a single environment where I would call it “problematic”. I have always felt that it did not materially improve policy implementation with regard to IPv6 and I stand by that sentiment. I remain unconvinced that it is unimportant for IPv4, despite the escalating costs of IPv4 addresses. >> In light of the administrative burden to customers and undefined benefit, >> ARIN proposes dropping the Officer Attestation requirement – note that this >> specifically does not change documentation requirements related organization >> recovery of IP number resources or related anti-fraud measures that ARIN has >> implemented. I think removing this requirement for IPv4 is premature at best. I think removing this requirement for IPv6 is long overdue as it has never served a policy purpose. Owen >> >> This consultation will remain open for 10 days. >> >> Please provide comments to [email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]>. You can subscribe to this mailing list at: >> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-consult >> <http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-consult>. >> >> Discussion on [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> will >> close on 13 August 2021. >> >> Regards, >> >> John Curran >> President and CEO >> American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN) >> >> _______________________________________________ >> ARIN-Consult >> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN >> Consult Mailing >> List ([email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>). >> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: >> https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-consult >> <https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-consult> Please contact the >> ARIN Member Services >> Help Desk at [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> if you experience any >> issues. >
