[arin-ppml] Weekly posting summary for p...@arin.net

[narten]

Total of 12 messages in the last 7 days.
 
script run at: Fri 15 May 2020 12:53:04 AM EDT
 
Messages   |  Bytes| Who
+--++--+
 16.67% |2 | 18.16% |   104749 | o...@delong.com
 16.67% |2 | 17.07% |98426 | takoka...@gmail.com
  8.33% |1 | 10.09% |58174 | ch...@semihuman.com
  8.33% |1 |  9.62% |55465 | hanni...@gmail.com
  8.33% |1 |  9.52% |54885 | rudi.dan...@gmail.com
  8.33% |1 |  9.32% |53779 | m...@iptrading.com
  8.33% |1 |  8.68% |50055 | fhfredi...@gmail.com
  8.33% |1 |  8.49% |48972 | scottleibr...@gmail.com
  8.33% |1 |  7.45% |42970 | bjo...@vt.edu
  8.33% |1 |  1.61% | 9272 | nar...@us.ibm.com
+--++--+
100.00% |   12 |100.00% |   576747 | Total
___
ARIN-PPML
You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML@arin.net).
Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
Please contact i...@arin.net if you experience any issues.

Re: [arin-ppml] Revised and Reverted to Draft Policy - Draft Policy ARIN-2019-1: Clarify Section 4 IPv4 Request Requirements

[Rudolph Daniel]

PM. Organizations should be
> informed of how their activities in the transfer market will impact them in
> reference to applying to the waitlist. These changes were to make it easier
> for staff and the community to understand these requirements.
> >>>>
> >>>> While I understand the desire to do this, I must point out that
> having the same rule specified in multiple places in the NRPM tends to lead
> to inconsistencies down the road.
> >>>>
> >>>> It is not at all unusual in this situation for a future policy
> proposal to miss one of these duplicate statements of the same rule and
> update only a subset of them. Even the above inconsistency in this proposal
> between 90 days in section 4 and 3 months for the same thing twice in
> section 8 serves as an example of the perils of duplicating the same rule
> in multiple locations.
> >>>>
> >>>> I suggest, therefore, that instead of duplicating the rules, we
> reference section 4.1.8  in each of those cases as follows:
> >>>>
> >>>> Recipients should be aware of the impact of transfers on
> their ability to apply and/or obtain space from the waitlist. These are
> spelled out in section 4.1.8.
> >>>>
> >>>> This provides clarity that there is an impact to be considered and
> clear guidance as to where to find that impact without abetting
> inconsistency.
> >>>>
> >>>> Owen
> >>>>
> >>>> ___
> >>>> ARIN-PPML
> >>>> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
> >>>> the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML@arin.net).
> >>>> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
> >>>> https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
> >>>> Please contact i...@arin.net if you experience any issues.
> >>
> >>
> >> ___
> >> ARIN-PPML
> >> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
> >> the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML@arin.net).
> >> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
> >> https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
> >> Please contact i...@arin.net if you experience any issues.
> > ___
> > ARIN-PPML
> > You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
> > the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML@arin.net).
> > Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
> > https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
> > Please contact i...@arin.net if you experience any issues.
> -- next part --
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20200514/40edceaf/attachment.htm
> >
>
> --
>
> Subject: Digest Footer
>
> ___
> ARIN-PPML mailing list
> ARIN-PPML@arin.net
> https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
>
>
> --
>
> End of ARIN-PPML Digest, Vol 179, Issue 6
> *
>

<https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email_source=link_campaign=sig-email_content=webmail_term=icon>
Virus-free.
www.avast.com
<https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email_source=link_campaign=sig-email_content=webmail_term=link>
<#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
___
ARIN-PPML
You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML@arin.net).
Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
Please contact i...@arin.net if you experience any issues.

Re: [arin-ppml] Revised and Reverted to Draft Policy - Draft Policy ARIN-2019-1: Clarify Section 4 IPv4 Request Requirements

[Kat Hunter]

This is great feedback. Thank you everyone. I agree with removing
"summarily" is an easy correction and is probably an unnecessary word.
Thanks all.

Kat

On Thu, May 14, 2020 at 3:59 PM Martin Hannigan  wrote:

>
> Makes sense to me. +1
>
> On Thu, May 14, 2020 at 1:50 PM Mike Burns  wrote:
>
>> I would support it with the removal of the pompous and meaningless word
>> “summarily”.
>>
>> I like a clean NRPM.
>>
>>
>>
>> Regards,
>> Mike
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* ARIN-PPML  *On Behalf Of *Chris
>> Woodfield
>> *Sent:* Thursday, May 14, 2020 1:40 PM
>> *To:* Owen DeLong ; ARIN-PPML List 
>> *Subject:* Re: [arin-ppml] Revised and Reverted to Draft Policy - Draft
>> Policy ARIN-2019-1: Clarify Section 4 IPv4 Request Requirements
>>
>>
>>
>> I support as written, but agree that the word can be removed from the
>> proposal without changing its intent, so happy to see it removed.
>>
>>
>>
>> -Chris
>>
>>
>>
>> On May 14, 2020, at 9:49 AM, Owen DeLong  wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> I don’t construe it that way, but I have no objection to either of
>> Scott’s suggestions, either.
>>
>>
>>
>> My concern is for the end effect of the proposed policy which is the same
>> with any of the proposed wordings.
>>
>>
>>
>> Owen
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On May 14, 2020, at 09:10 , Scott Leibrand 
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> "Summarily" seems punitive, and doesn't seem necessary in this context.
>> Perhaps just remove it and just leave "will be removed from the waitlist"?
>> Or replace it with something like "immediately".
>>
>>
>>
>> -Scott
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, May 14, 2020 at 8:50 AM Owen DeLong  wrote:
>>
>> I support this addition and support the policy with the addition.
>>
>>
>>
>> Owen
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On May 14, 2020, at 08:37, Fernando Frediani 
>> wrote:
>>
>> 
>>
>> I support this proposal.
>> It's fair to everybody and helps avoid fraud.
>>
>> Regards
>> Fernando
>>
>> On 14/05/2020 11:56, Kat Hunter wrote:
>>
>> After making adjustments to the text, ARIN staff and legal conducted a
>> new staff and legal review on 2019-1. You can view the updated review here:
>> https://www.arin.net/participate/policy/drafts/2019_1/#staff-and-legal-review-30-april-2020
>>  .
>> It has been suggested that
>>
>> "It is worth noting that this Draft Policy does not include the removal
>> of pending ARIN Waitlist requests for organizations that act as source
>> organizations for 8.2, 8.3, or 8.4 transfers, which would allow them to
>> conduct such transfers while waitlisted, and receive resources from the
>> ARIN Waitlist immediately thereafter, as all organizations on the ARIN
>> Waitlist have already applied, and are pending fulfillment.
>>
>> The text is clear and understandable, and can be implemented as written."
>>
>> After some discussion with some members of the AC, it was suggested that
>> a new subsection is added to section 8 which would allow for additional
>> clarity from this policy and some future cleanup via other future policy.
>>
>> "8.6 Waitlist Restrictions
>>
>> Any organization which is on the wait list and submits a request to be
>> the source of a transfer under any provision in section 8 will be summarily
>> removed from the wait list."
>>
>> I'd like to get the community's thoughts on the addition. With this
>> addition, would you support the policy as written?
>>
>> -Kat Hunter
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Mar 24, 2020 at 1:24 PM Kat Hunter  wrote:
>>
>> Owen, I think this is a good suggestion. I've updated the month
>> designations in the other section to 90 days as, I agree, it is more
>> precise when we are discussing shorter amounts of time. Additionally, I've
>> taken your suggestion on wordsmithing that section and adjusted it just a
>> little.
>>
>>
>>
>> " An organization which serves as the source of an 8.2 IPv4 transfer will
>> not be allowed to apply for IPv4 address space under section 4.1.8 ARIN
>> Waitlist for a period of 36 months following said transfer unless the
>> recipient organization remains a subsidiary, parent company, or under
>> common ownership with the source organization.".
>>
>>
>>
>> I wanted to make sure I specified that this was in reference to IPv4 and
>> that the organization also remains a subsidiary, parent company, or under
>> common ownership.  Thank you for the input. Additionally I'd like to see if
>> there is anyone else that still supports or no longer longer supports this
>> policy as written.
>>
>>
>>
>> Kat Hunter
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Mar 11, 2020 at 4:42 AM Owen DeLong  wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> > On Mar 9, 2020, at 06:26 , ARIN  wrote:
>> >
>> > On 20 February 2020, the ARIN Advisory Council (AC) reverted the
>> following Recommended Draft Policy to Draft Policy Status due to community
>> feedback recommending significant substantive changes.:
>> >
>> > * Draft Policy ARIN-2019-1: Clarify Section 4 IPv4 Request Requirements
>> >
>> > The text has since been revised in response to that feedback.
>> >
>> > Revised text is below and can be found at:
>> >
>> > 

Re: [arin-ppml] Revised and Reverted to Draft Policy - Draft Policy ARIN-2019-1: Clarify Section 4 IPv4 Request Requirements

[Martin Hannigan]

Makes sense to me. +1

On Thu, May 14, 2020 at 1:50 PM Mike Burns  wrote:

> I would support it with the removal of the pompous and meaningless word
> “summarily”.
>
> I like a clean NRPM.
>
>
>
> Regards,
> Mike
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* ARIN-PPML  *On Behalf Of *Chris
> Woodfield
> *Sent:* Thursday, May 14, 2020 1:40 PM
> *To:* Owen DeLong ; ARIN-PPML List 
> *Subject:* Re: [arin-ppml] Revised and Reverted to Draft Policy - Draft
> Policy ARIN-2019-1: Clarify Section 4 IPv4 Request Requirements
>
>
>
> I support as written, but agree that the word can be removed from the
> proposal without changing its intent, so happy to see it removed.
>
>
>
> -Chris
>
>
>
> On May 14, 2020, at 9:49 AM, Owen DeLong  wrote:
>
>
>
> I don’t construe it that way, but I have no objection to either of Scott’s
> suggestions, either.
>
>
>
> My concern is for the end effect of the proposed policy which is the same
> with any of the proposed wordings.
>
>
>
> Owen
>
>
>
>
>
> On May 14, 2020, at 09:10 , Scott Leibrand 
> wrote:
>
>
>
> "Summarily" seems punitive, and doesn't seem necessary in this context.
> Perhaps just remove it and just leave "will be removed from the waitlist"?
> Or replace it with something like "immediately".
>
>
>
> -Scott
>
>
>
> On Thu, May 14, 2020 at 8:50 AM Owen DeLong  wrote:
>
> I support this addition and support the policy with the addition.
>
>
>
> Owen
>
>
>
>
>
> On May 14, 2020, at 08:37, Fernando Frediani  wrote:
>
> 
>
> I support this proposal.
> It's fair to everybody and helps avoid fraud.
>
> Regards
> Fernando
>
> On 14/05/2020 11:56, Kat Hunter wrote:
>
> After making adjustments to the text, ARIN staff and legal conducted a new
> staff and legal review on 2019-1. You can view the updated review here:
> https://www.arin.net/participate/policy/drafts/2019_1/#staff-and-legal-review-30-april-2020
>  .
> It has been suggested that
>
> "It is worth noting that this Draft Policy does not include the removal of
> pending ARIN Waitlist requests for organizations that act as source
> organizations for 8.2, 8.3, or 8.4 transfers, which would allow them to
> conduct such transfers while waitlisted, and receive resources from the
> ARIN Waitlist immediately thereafter, as all organizations on the ARIN
> Waitlist have already applied, and are pending fulfillment.
>
> The text is clear and understandable, and can be implemented as written."
>
> After some discussion with some members of the AC, it was suggested that a
> new subsection is added to section 8 which would allow for additional
> clarity from this policy and some future cleanup via other future policy.
>
> "8.6 Waitlist Restrictions
>
> Any organization which is on the wait list and submits a request to be the
> source of a transfer under any provision in section 8 will be summarily
> removed from the wait list."
>
> I'd like to get the community's thoughts on the addition. With this
> addition, would you support the policy as written?
>
> -Kat Hunter
>
>
>
> On Tue, Mar 24, 2020 at 1:24 PM Kat Hunter  wrote:
>
> Owen, I think this is a good suggestion. I've updated the month
> designations in the other section to 90 days as, I agree, it is more
> precise when we are discussing shorter amounts of time. Additionally, I've
> taken your suggestion on wordsmithing that section and adjusted it just a
> little.
>
>
>
> " An organization which serves as the source of an 8.2 IPv4 transfer will
> not be allowed to apply for IPv4 address space under section 4.1.8 ARIN
> Waitlist for a period of 36 months following said transfer unless the
> recipient organization remains a subsidiary, parent company, or under
> common ownership with the source organization.".
>
>
>
> I wanted to make sure I specified that this was in reference to IPv4 and
> that the organization also remains a subsidiary, parent company, or under
> common ownership.  Thank you for the input. Additionally I'd like to see if
> there is anyone else that still supports or no longer longer supports this
> policy as written.
>
>
>
> Kat Hunter
>
>
>
> On Wed, Mar 11, 2020 at 4:42 AM Owen DeLong  wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Mar 9, 2020, at 06:26 , ARIN  wrote:
> >
> > On 20 February 2020, the ARIN Advisory Council (AC) reverted the
> following Recommended Draft Policy to Draft Policy Status due to community
> feedback recommending significant substantive changes.:
> >
> > * Draft Policy ARIN-2019-1: Clarify Section 4 IPv4 Request Requirements
> >
> > The text has since been revised in response to that feedback.
> >
> > Revised text is below and can be found at:
> >
> > https://www.arin.net/participate/policy/drafts/2019_1/
> >
> > 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
> > 

Re: [arin-ppml] Revised and Reverted to Draft Policy - Draft Policy ARIN-2019-1: Clarify Section 4 IPv4 Request Requirements

[Brian Jones]

I support this proposal as written.
—
Brian

On Thu, May 14, 2020 at 10:56 AM Kat Hunter  wrote:

> After making adjustments to the text, ARIN staff and legal conducted a new
> staff and legal review on 2019-1. You can view the updated review here:
> https://www.arin.net/participate/policy/drafts/2019_1/#staff-and-legal-review-30-april-2020
>  .
> It has been suggested that
> "It is worth noting that this Draft Policy does not include the removal
> of pending ARIN Waitlist requests for organizations that act as source
> organizations for 8.2, 8.3, or 8.4 transfers, which would allow them to
> conduct such transfers while waitlisted, and receive resources from the
> ARIN Waitlist immediately thereafter, as all organizations on the ARIN
> Waitlist have already applied, and are pending fulfillment.
>
> The text is clear and understandable, and can be implemented as written."
>
> After some discussion with some members of the AC, it was suggested that a
> new subsection is added to section 8 which would allow for additional
> clarity from this policy and some future cleanup via other future policy.
>
> "8.6 Waitlist Restrictions
>
> Any organization which is on the wait list and submits a request to be the
> source of a transfer under any provision in section 8 will be summarily
> removed from the wait list."
>
> I'd like to get the community's thoughts on the addition. With this
> addition, would you support the policy as written?
>
> -Kat Hunter
>
> On Tue, Mar 24, 2020 at 1:24 PM Kat Hunter  wrote:
>
>> Owen, I think this is a good suggestion. I've updated the month
>> designations in the other section to 90 days as, I agree, it is more
>> precise when we are discussing shorter amounts of time. Additionally, I've
>> taken your suggestion on wordsmithing that section and adjusted it just a
>> little.
>>
>> " An organization which serves as the source of an 8.2 IPv4 transfer will
>> not be allowed to apply for IPv4 address space under section 4.1.8 ARIN
>> Waitlist for a period of 36 months following said transfer unless the
>> recipient organization remains a subsidiary, parent company, or under
>> common ownership with the source organization.".
>>
>> I wanted to make sure I specified that this was in reference to IPv4 and
>> that the organization also remains a subsidiary, parent company, or under
>> common ownership.  Thank you for the input. Additionally I'd like to see if
>> there is anyone else that still supports or no longer longer supports this
>> policy as written.
>>
>> Kat Hunter
>>
>> On Wed, Mar 11, 2020 at 4:42 AM Owen DeLong  wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> > On Mar 9, 2020, at 06:26 , ARIN  wrote:
>>> >
>>> > On 20 February 2020, the ARIN Advisory Council (AC) reverted the
>>> following Recommended Draft Policy to Draft Policy Status due to community
>>> feedback recommending significant substantive changes.:
>>> >
>>> > * Draft Policy ARIN-2019-1: Clarify Section 4 IPv4 Request Requirements
>>> >
>>> > The text has since been revised in response to that feedback.
>>> >
>>> > Revised text is below and can be found at:
>>> >
>>> > https://www.arin.net/participate/policy/drafts/2019_1/
>>> >
>>> > 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/participate/policy/pdp/
>>> >
>>> > Draft Policies and Proposals under discussion can be found at:
>>> > https://www.arin.net/participate/policy/drafts/
>>> >
>>> > Regards,
>>> >
>>> > Sean Hopkins
>>> > Policy Analyst
>>> > American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN)
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > Draft Policy ARIN-2019-1: Clarify Section 4 IPv4 Request Requirements
>>> >
>>> > Problem Statement:
>>> >
>>> > Per a recent ARIN Policy Experience Report and resulting AC
>>> discussion, it was noted that the language of Section 4.1.8 is imprecise in
>>> that it can be interpreted as specifying a waiting period for any
>>> allocation activity, as opposed to being intended to limit only the
>>> frequency of IPv4 allocations under Section 4.
>>> >
>>> > The same Policy Experience Report also noted that ARIN staff has
>>> observed a pattern where an organization transfers space under NRPM Section
>>> 8.2 to a specified recipient, and then immediately applies for space under
>>> Section 4. This activity appears to be speculative in nature and not
>>> consistent with sound address management policy.
>>> >
>>> > The updated language in this proposal addresses the two issues above,
>>> as both concerns can be addressed via modifications to the same section and
>>> sentence thereof of the NRPM:
>>> >
>>> > Clarifies the 

Re: [arin-ppml] Revised and Reverted to Draft Policy - Draft Policy ARIN-2019-1: Clarify Section 4 IPv4 Request Requirements

[Mike Burns]

I would support it with the removal of the pompous and meaningless word 
“summarily”.  

I like a clean NRPM.

 

Regards,
Mike

 

 

From: ARIN-PPML  On Behalf Of Chris Woodfield
Sent: Thursday, May 14, 2020 1:40 PM
To: Owen DeLong ; ARIN-PPML List 
Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Revised and Reverted to Draft Policy - Draft Policy 
ARIN-2019-1: Clarify Section 4 IPv4 Request Requirements

 

I support as written, but agree that the word can be removed from the proposal 
without changing its intent, so happy to see it removed.

 

-Chris





On May 14, 2020, at 9:49 AM, Owen DeLong mailto:o...@delong.com> > wrote:

 

I don’t construe it that way, but I have no objection to either of Scott’s 
suggestions, either.

 

My concern is for the end effect of the proposed policy which is the same with 
any of the proposed wordings.

 

Owen

 





On May 14, 2020, at 09:10 , Scott Leibrand mailto:scottleibr...@gmail.com> > wrote:

 

"Summarily" seems punitive, and doesn't seem necessary in this context. Perhaps 
just remove it and just leave "will be removed from the waitlist"? Or replace 
it with something like "immediately".

 

-Scott

 

On Thu, May 14, 2020 at 8:50 AM Owen DeLong mailto:o...@delong.com> > wrote:

I support this addition and support the policy with the addition. 

 

Owen

 





On May 14, 2020, at 08:37, Fernando Frediani mailto:fhfredi...@gmail.com> > wrote:

 

I support this proposal.
It's fair to everybody and helps avoid fraud.

Regards
Fernando

On 14/05/2020 11:56, Kat Hunter wrote:

After making adjustments to the text, ARIN staff and legal conducted a new 
staff and legal review on 2019-1. You can view the updated review here: 
https://www.arin.net/participate/policy/drafts/2019_1/#staff-and-legal-review-30-april-2020
 . It has been suggested that  

"It is worth noting that this Draft Policy does not include the removal of 
pending ARIN Waitlist requests for organizations that act as source 
organizations for 8.2, 8.3, or 8.4 transfers, which would allow them to conduct 
such transfers while waitlisted, and receive resources from the ARIN Waitlist 
immediately thereafter, as all organizations on the ARIN Waitlist have already 
applied, and are pending fulfillment.

The text is clear and understandable, and can be implemented as written."

After some discussion with some members of the AC, it was suggested that a new 
subsection is added to section 8 which would allow for additional clarity from 
this policy and some future cleanup via other future policy.

"8.6 Waitlist Restrictions

Any organization which is on the wait list and submits a request to be the 
source of a transfer under any provision in section 8 will be summarily removed 
from the wait list."

I'd like to get the community's thoughts on the addition. With this addition, 
would you support the policy as written? 

-Kat Hunter

 

On Tue, Mar 24, 2020 at 1:24 PM Kat Hunter mailto:takoka...@gmail.com> > wrote:

Owen, I think this is a good suggestion. I've updated the month designations in 
the other section to 90 days as, I agree, it is more precise when we are 
discussing shorter amounts of time. Additionally, I've taken your suggestion on 
wordsmithing that section and adjusted it just a little.  

 

" An organization which serves as the source of an 8.2 IPv4 transfer will not 
be allowed to apply for IPv4 address space under section 4.1.8 ARIN Waitlist 
for a period of 36 months following said transfer unless the recipient 
organization remains a subsidiary, parent company, or under common ownership 
with the source organization.". 

 

I wanted to make sure I specified that this was in reference to IPv4 and that 
the organization also remains a subsidiary, parent company, or under common 
ownership.  Thank you for the input. Additionally I'd like to see if there is 
anyone else that still supports or no longer longer supports this policy as 
written.

 

Kat Hunter

 

On Wed, Mar 11, 2020 at 4:42 AM Owen DeLong mailto:o...@delong.com> > wrote:



> On Mar 9, 2020, at 06:26 , ARIN mailto:i...@arin.net> > wrote:
> 
> On 20 February 2020, the ARIN Advisory Council (AC) reverted the following 
> Recommended Draft Policy to Draft Policy Status due to community feedback 
> recommending significant substantive changes.:
> 
> * Draft Policy ARIN-2019-1: Clarify Section 4 IPv4 Request Requirements
> 
> The text has since been revised in response to that feedback.
> 
> Revised text is below and can be found at:
> 
> https://www.arin.net/participate/policy/drafts/2019_1/
> 
> 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:
> 

Re: [arin-ppml] Revised and Reverted to Draft Policy - Draft Policy ARIN-2019-1: Clarify Section 4 IPv4 Request Requirements

[Chris Woodfield]

I support as written, but agree that the word can be removed from the proposal 
without changing its intent, so happy to see it removed.

-Chris

> On May 14, 2020, at 9:49 AM, Owen DeLong  wrote:
> 
> I don’t construe it that way, but I have no objection to either of Scott’s 
> suggestions, either.
> 
> My concern is for the end effect of the proposed policy which is the same 
> with any of the proposed wordings.
> 
> Owen
> 
> 
>> On May 14, 2020, at 09:10 , Scott Leibrand > > wrote:
>> 
>> "Summarily" seems punitive, and doesn't seem necessary in this context. 
>> Perhaps just remove it and just leave "will be removed from the waitlist"? 
>> Or replace it with something like "immediately".
>> 
>> -Scott
>> 
>> On Thu, May 14, 2020 at 8:50 AM Owen DeLong > > wrote:
>> I support this addition and support the policy with the addition. 
>> 
>> Owen
>> 
>> 
>>> On May 14, 2020, at 08:37, Fernando Frediani >> > wrote:
>>> 
>>> 
>>> I support this proposal.
>>> It's fair to everybody and helps avoid fraud.
>>> 
>>> Regards
>>> Fernando
>>> 
>>> On 14/05/2020 11:56, Kat Hunter wrote:
 After making adjustments to the text, ARIN staff and legal conducted a new 
 staff and legal review on 2019-1. You can view the updated review here: 
 https://www.arin.net/participate/policy/drafts/2019_1/#staff-and-legal-review-30-april-2020
  
 
  . It has been suggested that 
 "It is worth noting that this Draft Policy does not include the removal of 
 pending ARIN Waitlist requests for organizations that act as source 
 organizations for 8.2, 8.3, or 8.4 transfers, which would allow them to 
 conduct such transfers while waitlisted, and receive resources from the 
 ARIN Waitlist immediately thereafter, as all organizations on the ARIN 
 Waitlist have already applied, and are pending fulfillment.
 The text is clear and understandable, and can be implemented as written."
 
 After some discussion with some members of the AC, it was suggested that a 
 new subsection is added to section 8 which would allow for additional 
 clarity from this policy and some future cleanup via other future policy.
 
 "8.6 Waitlist Restrictions
 
 Any organization which is on the wait list and submits a request to be the 
 source of a transfer under any provision in section 8 will be summarily 
 removed from the wait list."
 
 I'd like to get the community's thoughts on the addition. With this 
 addition, would you support the policy as written? 
 
 -Kat Hunter
 
 
 On Tue, Mar 24, 2020 at 1:24 PM Kat Hunter >>> > wrote:
 Owen, I think this is a good suggestion. I've updated the month 
 designations in the other section to 90 days as, I agree, it is more 
 precise when we are discussing shorter amounts of time. Additionally, I've 
 taken your suggestion on wordsmithing that section and adjusted it just a 
 little. 
 
 " An organization which serves as the source of an 8.2 IPv4 transfer will 
 not be allowed to apply for IPv4 address space under section 4.1.8 ARIN 
 Waitlist for a period of 36 months following said transfer unless the 
 recipient organization remains a subsidiary, parent company, or under 
 common ownership with the source organization.". 
 
 I wanted to make sure I specified that this was in reference to IPv4 and 
 that the organization also remains a subsidiary, parent company, or under 
 common ownership.  Thank you for the input. Additionally I'd like to see 
 if there is anyone else that still supports or no longer longer supports 
 this policy as written.
 
 Kat Hunter
 
 On Wed, Mar 11, 2020 at 4:42 AM Owen DeLong >>> > wrote:
 
 
 > On Mar 9, 2020, at 06:26 , ARIN mailto:i...@arin.net>> 
 > wrote:
 > 
 > On 20 February 2020, the ARIN Advisory Council (AC) reverted the 
 > following Recommended Draft Policy to Draft Policy Status due to 
 > community feedback recommending significant substantive changes.:
 > 
 > * Draft Policy ARIN-2019-1: Clarify Section 4 IPv4 Request Requirements
 > 
 > The text has since been revised in response to that feedback.
 > 
 > Revised text is below and can be found at:
 > 
 > https://www.arin.net/participate/policy/drafts/2019_1/ 
 > 
 > 
 > 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, 

Re: [arin-ppml] Revised and Reverted to Draft Policy - Draft Policy ARIN-2019-1: Clarify Section 4 IPv4 Request Requirements

[Owen DeLong]

I don’t construe it that way, but I have no objection to either of Scott’s 
suggestions, either.

My concern is for the end effect of the proposed policy which is the same with 
any of the proposed wordings.

Owen


> On May 14, 2020, at 09:10 , Scott Leibrand  wrote:
> 
> "Summarily" seems punitive, and doesn't seem necessary in this context. 
> Perhaps just remove it and just leave "will be removed from the waitlist"? Or 
> replace it with something like "immediately".
> 
> -Scott
> 
> On Thu, May 14, 2020 at 8:50 AM Owen DeLong  > wrote:
> I support this addition and support the policy with the addition. 
> 
> Owen
> 
> 
>> On May 14, 2020, at 08:37, Fernando Frediani > > wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> I support this proposal.
>> It's fair to everybody and helps avoid fraud.
>> 
>> Regards
>> Fernando
>> 
>> On 14/05/2020 11:56, Kat Hunter wrote:
>>> After making adjustments to the text, ARIN staff and legal conducted a new 
>>> staff and legal review on 2019-1. You can view the updated review here: 
>>> https://www.arin.net/participate/policy/drafts/2019_1/#staff-and-legal-review-30-april-2020
>>>  
>>> 
>>>  . It has been suggested that 
>>> "It is worth noting that this Draft Policy does not include the removal of 
>>> pending ARIN Waitlist requests for organizations that act as source 
>>> organizations for 8.2, 8.3, or 8.4 transfers, which would allow them to 
>>> conduct such transfers while waitlisted, and receive resources from the 
>>> ARIN Waitlist immediately thereafter, as all organizations on the ARIN 
>>> Waitlist have already applied, and are pending fulfillment.
>>> The text is clear and understandable, and can be implemented as written."
>>> 
>>> After some discussion with some members of the AC, it was suggested that a 
>>> new subsection is added to section 8 which would allow for additional 
>>> clarity from this policy and some future cleanup via other future policy.
>>> 
>>> "8.6 Waitlist Restrictions
>>> 
>>> Any organization which is on the wait list and submits a request to be the 
>>> source of a transfer under any provision in section 8 will be summarily 
>>> removed from the wait list."
>>> 
>>> I'd like to get the community's thoughts on the addition. With this 
>>> addition, would you support the policy as written? 
>>> 
>>> -Kat Hunter
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On Tue, Mar 24, 2020 at 1:24 PM Kat Hunter >> > wrote:
>>> Owen, I think this is a good suggestion. I've updated the month 
>>> designations in the other section to 90 days as, I agree, it is more 
>>> precise when we are discussing shorter amounts of time. Additionally, I've 
>>> taken your suggestion on wordsmithing that section and adjusted it just a 
>>> little. 
>>> 
>>> " An organization which serves as the source of an 8.2 IPv4 transfer will 
>>> not be allowed to apply for IPv4 address space under section 4.1.8 ARIN 
>>> Waitlist for a period of 36 months following said transfer unless the 
>>> recipient organization remains a subsidiary, parent company, or under 
>>> common ownership with the source organization.". 
>>> 
>>> I wanted to make sure I specified that this was in reference to IPv4 and 
>>> that the organization also remains a subsidiary, parent company, or under 
>>> common ownership.  Thank you for the input. Additionally I'd like to see if 
>>> there is anyone else that still supports or no longer longer supports this 
>>> policy as written.
>>> 
>>> Kat Hunter
>>> 
>>> On Wed, Mar 11, 2020 at 4:42 AM Owen DeLong >> > wrote:
>>> 
>>> 
>>> > On Mar 9, 2020, at 06:26 , ARIN mailto:i...@arin.net>> 
>>> > wrote:
>>> > 
>>> > On 20 February 2020, the ARIN Advisory Council (AC) reverted the 
>>> > following Recommended Draft Policy to Draft Policy Status due to 
>>> > community feedback recommending significant substantive changes.:
>>> > 
>>> > * Draft Policy ARIN-2019-1: Clarify Section 4 IPv4 Request Requirements
>>> > 
>>> > The text has since been revised in response to that feedback.
>>> > 
>>> > Revised text is below and can be found at:
>>> > 
>>> > https://www.arin.net/participate/policy/drafts/2019_1/ 
>>> > 
>>> > 
>>> > 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/participate/policy/pdp/ 
>>> > 
>>> > 
>>> > Draft Policies and Proposals under 

Re: [arin-ppml] Revised and Reverted to Draft Policy - Draft Policy ARIN-2019-1: Clarify Section 4 IPv4 Request Requirements

[Scott Leibrand]

"Summarily" seems punitive, and doesn't seem necessary in this context.
Perhaps just remove it and just leave "will be removed from the waitlist"?
Or replace it with something like "immediately".

-Scott

On Thu, May 14, 2020 at 8:50 AM Owen DeLong  wrote:

> I support this addition and support the policy with the addition.
>
> Owen
>
>
> On May 14, 2020, at 08:37, Fernando Frediani  wrote:
>
> 
>
> I support this proposal.
> It's fair to everybody and helps avoid fraud.
>
> Regards
> Fernando
> On 14/05/2020 11:56, Kat Hunter wrote:
>
> After making adjustments to the text, ARIN staff and legal conducted a new
> staff and legal review on 2019-1. You can view the updated review here:
> https://www.arin.net/participate/policy/drafts/2019_1/#staff-and-legal-review-30-april-2020
>  .
> It has been suggested that
> "It is worth noting that this Draft Policy does not include the removal
> of pending ARIN Waitlist requests for organizations that act as source
> organizations for 8.2, 8.3, or 8.4 transfers, which would allow them to
> conduct such transfers while waitlisted, and receive resources from the
> ARIN Waitlist immediately thereafter, as all organizations on the ARIN
> Waitlist have already applied, and are pending fulfillment.
>
> The text is clear and understandable, and can be implemented as written."
>
> After some discussion with some members of the AC, it was suggested that a
> new subsection is added to section 8 which would allow for additional
> clarity from this policy and some future cleanup via other future policy.
>
> "8.6 Waitlist Restrictions
>
> Any organization which is on the wait list and submits a request to be the
> source of a transfer under any provision in section 8 will be summarily
> removed from the wait list."
>
> I'd like to get the community's thoughts on the addition. With this
> addition, would you support the policy as written?
>
> -Kat Hunter
>
> On Tue, Mar 24, 2020 at 1:24 PM Kat Hunter  wrote:
>
>> Owen, I think this is a good suggestion. I've updated the month
>> designations in the other section to 90 days as, I agree, it is more
>> precise when we are discussing shorter amounts of time. Additionally, I've
>> taken your suggestion on wordsmithing that section and adjusted it just a
>> little.
>>
>> " An organization which serves as the source of an 8.2 IPv4 transfer will
>> not be allowed to apply for IPv4 address space under section 4.1.8 ARIN
>> Waitlist for a period of 36 months following said transfer unless the
>> recipient organization remains a subsidiary, parent company, or under
>> common ownership with the source organization.".
>>
>> I wanted to make sure I specified that this was in reference to IPv4 and
>> that the organization also remains a subsidiary, parent company, or under
>> common ownership.  Thank you for the input. Additionally I'd like to see if
>> there is anyone else that still supports or no longer longer supports this
>> policy as written.
>>
>> Kat Hunter
>>
>> On Wed, Mar 11, 2020 at 4:42 AM Owen DeLong  wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> > On Mar 9, 2020, at 06:26 , ARIN  wrote:
>>> >
>>> > On 20 February 2020, the ARIN Advisory Council (AC) reverted the
>>> following Recommended Draft Policy to Draft Policy Status due to community
>>> feedback recommending significant substantive changes.:
>>> >
>>> > * Draft Policy ARIN-2019-1: Clarify Section 4 IPv4 Request Requirements
>>> >
>>> > The text has since been revised in response to that feedback.
>>> >
>>> > Revised text is below and can be found at:
>>> >
>>> > https://www.arin.net/participate/policy/drafts/2019_1/
>>> >
>>> > 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/participate/policy/pdp/
>>> >
>>> > Draft Policies and Proposals under discussion can be found at:
>>> > https://www.arin.net/participate/policy/drafts/
>>> >
>>> > Regards,
>>> >
>>> > Sean Hopkins
>>> > Policy Analyst
>>> > American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN)
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > Draft Policy ARIN-2019-1: Clarify Section 4 IPv4 Request Requirements
>>> >
>>> > Problem Statement:
>>> >
>>> > Per a recent ARIN Policy Experience Report and resulting AC
>>> discussion, it was noted that the language of Section 4.1.8 is imprecise in
>>> that it can be interpreted as specifying a waiting period for any
>>> allocation activity, as opposed to being intended to limit only the
>>> frequency of IPv4 allocations under Section 4.
>>> >
>>> > The same Policy Experience Report also noted that ARIN staff has
>>> observed a pattern where an organization transfers space 

Re: [arin-ppml] Revised and Reverted to Draft Policy - Draft Policy ARIN-2019-1: Clarify Section 4 IPv4 Request Requirements

[Owen DeLong]

I support this addition and support the policy with the addition. 

Owen


> On May 14, 2020, at 08:37, Fernando Frediani  wrote:
> 
> 
> I support this proposal.
> It's fair to everybody and helps avoid fraud.
> 
> Regards
> Fernando
> 
>> On 14/05/2020 11:56, Kat Hunter wrote:
>> After making adjustments to the text, ARIN staff and legal conducted a new 
>> staff and legal review on 2019-1. You can view the updated review here: 
>> https://www.arin.net/participate/policy/drafts/2019_1/#staff-and-legal-review-30-april-2020
>>  . It has been suggested that 
>> "It is worth noting that this Draft Policy does not include the removal of 
>> pending ARIN Waitlist requests for organizations that act as source 
>> organizations for 8.2, 8.3, or 8.4 transfers, which would allow them to 
>> conduct such transfers while waitlisted, and receive resources from the ARIN 
>> Waitlist immediately thereafter, as all organizations on the ARIN Waitlist 
>> have already applied, and are pending fulfillment.
>> The text is clear and understandable, and can be implemented as written."
>> 
>> After some discussion with some members of the AC, it was suggested that a 
>> new subsection is added to section 8 which would allow for additional 
>> clarity from this policy and some future cleanup via other future policy.
>> 
>> "8.6 Waitlist Restrictions
>> 
>> Any organization which is on the wait list and submits a request to be the 
>> source of a transfer under any provision in section 8 will be summarily 
>> removed from the wait list."
>> 
>> I'd like to get the community's thoughts on the addition. With this 
>> addition, would you support the policy as written? 
>> 
>> -Kat Hunter
>> 
>> 
>> On Tue, Mar 24, 2020 at 1:24 PM Kat Hunter  wrote:
>>> Owen, I think this is a good suggestion. I've updated the month 
>>> designations in the other section to 90 days as, I agree, it is more 
>>> precise when we are discussing shorter amounts of time. Additionally, I've 
>>> taken your suggestion on wordsmithing that section and adjusted it just a 
>>> little. 
>>> 
>>> " An organization which serves as the source of an 8.2 IPv4 transfer will 
>>> not be allowed to apply for IPv4 address space under section 4.1.8 ARIN 
>>> Waitlist for a period of 36 months following said transfer unless the 
>>> recipient organization remains a subsidiary, parent company, or under 
>>> common ownership with the source organization.". 
>>> 
>>> I wanted to make sure I specified that this was in reference to IPv4 and 
>>> that the organization also remains a subsidiary, parent company, or under 
>>> common ownership.  Thank you for the input. Additionally I'd like to see if 
>>> there is anyone else that still supports or no longer longer supports this 
>>> policy as written.
>>> 
>>> Kat Hunter
>>> 
>>> On Wed, Mar 11, 2020 at 4:42 AM Owen DeLong  wrote:
 
 
 > On Mar 9, 2020, at 06:26 , ARIN  wrote:
 > 
 > On 20 February 2020, the ARIN Advisory Council (AC) reverted the 
 > following Recommended Draft Policy to Draft Policy Status due to 
 > community feedback recommending significant substantive changes.:
 > 
 > * Draft Policy ARIN-2019-1: Clarify Section 4 IPv4 Request Requirements
 > 
 > The text has since been revised in response to that feedback.
 > 
 > Revised text is below and can be found at:
 > 
 > https://www.arin.net/participate/policy/drafts/2019_1/
 > 
 > 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/participate/policy/pdp/
 > 
 > Draft Policies and Proposals under discussion can be found at:
 > https://www.arin.net/participate/policy/drafts/
 > 
 > Regards,
 > 
 > Sean Hopkins
 > Policy Analyst
 > American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN)
 > 
 > 
 > 
 > 
 > Draft Policy ARIN-2019-1: Clarify Section 4 IPv4 Request Requirements
 > 
 > Problem Statement:
 > 
 > Per a recent ARIN Policy Experience Report and resulting AC discussion, 
 > it was noted that the language of Section 4.1.8 is imprecise in that it 
 > can be interpreted as specifying a waiting period for any allocation 
 > activity, as opposed to being intended to limit only the frequency of 
 > IPv4 allocations under Section 4.
 > 
 > The same Policy Experience Report also noted that ARIN staff has 
 > observed a pattern where an organization transfers space under NRPM 
 > Section 8.2 to a specified recipient, and then 

Re: [arin-ppml] Revised and Reverted to Draft Policy - Draft Policy ARIN-2019-1: Clarify Section 4 IPv4 Request Requirements

[Fernando Frediani]

I support this proposal.
It's fair to everybody and helps avoid fraud.

Regards
Fernando

On 14/05/2020 11:56, Kat Hunter wrote:
After making adjustments to the text, ARIN staff and legal conducted a 
new staff and legal review on 2019-1. You can view the updated review 
here: 
https://www.arin.net/participate/policy/drafts/2019_1/#staff-and-legal-review-30-april-2020 . 
It has been suggested that
"It is worth noting that this Draft Policy does not include the 
removal of pending ARIN Waitlist requests for organizations that act 
as source organizations for 8.2, 8.3, or 8.4 transfers, which would 
allow them to conduct such transfers while waitlisted, and receive 
resources from the ARIN Waitlist immediately thereafter, as all 
organizations on the ARIN Waitlist have already applied, and are 
pending fulfillment.


The text is clear and understandable, and can be implemented as written."

After some discussion with some members of the AC, it was suggested 
that a new subsection is added to section 8 which would allow for 
additional clarity from this policy and some future cleanup via other 
future policy.


"8.6 Waitlist Restrictions

Any organization which is on the wait list and submits a request to be 
the source of a transfer under any provision in section 8 will be 
summarily removed from the wait list."


I'd like to get the community's thoughts on the addition. With this 
addition, would you support the policy as written?


-Kat Hunter


On Tue, Mar 24, 2020 at 1:24 PM Kat Hunter > wrote:


Owen, I think this is a good suggestion. I've updated the month
designations in the other section to 90 days as, I agree, it is
more precise when we are discussing shorter amounts of time.
Additionally, I've taken your suggestion on wordsmithing that
section and adjusted it just a little.

" An organization which serves as the source of an 8.2 IPv4
transfer will not be allowed to apply for IPv4 address space under
section 4.1.8 ARIN Waitlist for a period of 36 months following
said transfer unless the recipient organization remains a
subsidiary, parent company, or under common ownership with the
source organization.".

I wanted to make sure I specified that this was in reference to
IPv4 and that the organization also remains a subsidiary, parent
company, or under common ownership. Thank you for the input.
Additionally I'd like to see if there is anyone else that still
supports or no longer longer supports this policy as written.

Kat Hunter

On Wed, Mar 11, 2020 at 4:42 AM Owen DeLong mailto:o...@delong.com>> wrote:



> On Mar 9, 2020, at 06:26 , ARIN mailto:i...@arin.net>> wrote:
>
> On 20 February 2020, the ARIN Advisory Council (AC) reverted
the following Recommended Draft Policy to Draft Policy Status
due to community feedback recommending significant substantive
changes.:
>
> * Draft Policy ARIN-2019-1: Clarify Section 4 IPv4 Request
Requirements
>
> The text has since been revised in response to that feedback.
>
> Revised text is below and can be found at:
>
> https://www.arin.net/participate/policy/drafts/2019_1/
>
> 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/participate/policy/pdp/
>
> Draft Policies and Proposals under discussion can be found at:
> https://www.arin.net/participate/policy/drafts/
>
> Regards,
>
> Sean Hopkins
> Policy Analyst
> American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN)
>
>
>
>
> Draft Policy ARIN-2019-1: Clarify Section 4 IPv4 Request
Requirements
>
> Problem Statement:
>
> Per a recent ARIN Policy Experience Report and resulting AC
discussion, it was noted that the language of Section 4.1.8 is
imprecise in that it can be interpreted as specifying a
waiting period for any allocation activity, as opposed to
being intended to limit only the frequency of IPv4 allocations
under Section 4.
>
> The same Policy Experience Report also noted that ARIN staff
has observed a pattern where an organization transfers space
under NRPM Section 8.2 to a specified recipient, and then
immediately applies for space under Section 4. This 

Re: [arin-ppml] Revised and Reverted to Draft Policy - Draft Policy ARIN-2019-1: Clarify Section 4 IPv4 Request Requirements

[Kat Hunter]

After making adjustments to the text, ARIN staff and legal conducted a new
staff and legal review on 2019-1. You can view the updated review here:
https://www.arin.net/participate/policy/drafts/2019_1/#staff-and-legal-review-30-april-2020
.
It has been suggested that
"It is worth noting that this Draft Policy does not include the removal of
pending ARIN Waitlist requests for organizations that act as source
organizations for 8.2, 8.3, or 8.4 transfers, which would allow them to
conduct such transfers while waitlisted, and receive resources from the
ARIN Waitlist immediately thereafter, as all organizations on the ARIN
Waitlist have already applied, and are pending fulfillment.

The text is clear and understandable, and can be implemented as written."

After some discussion with some members of the AC, it was suggested that a
new subsection is added to section 8 which would allow for additional
clarity from this policy and some future cleanup via other future policy.

"8.6 Waitlist Restrictions

Any organization which is on the wait list and submits a request to be the
source of a transfer under any provision in section 8 will be summarily
removed from the wait list."

I'd like to get the community's thoughts on the addition. With this
addition, would you support the policy as written?

-Kat Hunter

On Tue, Mar 24, 2020 at 1:24 PM Kat Hunter  wrote:

> Owen, I think this is a good suggestion. I've updated the month
> designations in the other section to 90 days as, I agree, it is more
> precise when we are discussing shorter amounts of time. Additionally, I've
> taken your suggestion on wordsmithing that section and adjusted it just a
> little.
>
> " An organization which serves as the source of an 8.2 IPv4 transfer will
> not be allowed to apply for IPv4 address space under section 4.1.8 ARIN
> Waitlist for a period of 36 months following said transfer unless the
> recipient organization remains a subsidiary, parent company, or under
> common ownership with the source organization.".
>
> I wanted to make sure I specified that this was in reference to IPv4 and
> that the organization also remains a subsidiary, parent company, or under
> common ownership.  Thank you for the input. Additionally I'd like to see if
> there is anyone else that still supports or no longer longer supports this
> policy as written.
>
> Kat Hunter
>
> On Wed, Mar 11, 2020 at 4:42 AM Owen DeLong  wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> > On Mar 9, 2020, at 06:26 , ARIN  wrote:
>> >
>> > On 20 February 2020, the ARIN Advisory Council (AC) reverted the
>> following Recommended Draft Policy to Draft Policy Status due to community
>> feedback recommending significant substantive changes.:
>> >
>> > * Draft Policy ARIN-2019-1: Clarify Section 4 IPv4 Request Requirements
>> >
>> > The text has since been revised in response to that feedback.
>> >
>> > Revised text is below and can be found at:
>> >
>> > https://www.arin.net/participate/policy/drafts/2019_1/
>> >
>> > 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/participate/policy/pdp/
>> >
>> > Draft Policies and Proposals under discussion can be found at:
>> > https://www.arin.net/participate/policy/drafts/
>> >
>> > Regards,
>> >
>> > Sean Hopkins
>> > Policy Analyst
>> > American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN)
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Draft Policy ARIN-2019-1: Clarify Section 4 IPv4 Request Requirements
>> >
>> > Problem Statement:
>> >
>> > Per a recent ARIN Policy Experience Report and resulting AC discussion,
>> it was noted that the language of Section 4.1.8 is imprecise in that it can
>> be interpreted as specifying a waiting period for any allocation activity,
>> as opposed to being intended to limit only the frequency of IPv4
>> allocations under Section 4.
>> >
>> > The same Policy Experience Report also noted that ARIN staff has
>> observed a pattern where an organization transfers space under NRPM Section
>> 8.2 to a specified recipient, and then immediately applies for space under
>> Section 4. This activity appears to be speculative in nature and not
>> consistent with sound address management policy.
>> >
>> > The updated language in this proposal addresses the two issues above,
>> as both concerns can be addressed via modifications to the same section and
>> sentence thereof of the NRPM:
>> >
>> > Clarifies the waiting period to only prohibit requests for IPv4
>> allocations under Section 4 of the NRPM
>> > Disallows organizations that have transferred space to other parties
>> within the past 36 months from applying for additional IPv4 space