First, While this policy has a clearly formed problem statement, I don't
support fixing the perceived problem and do not agree it is even a real
problem.
Then, the proposed solution to this none problem is "removing needs
testing" for small IPv4 transfers. I can not support the concept of
removing needs testing, that is a line I'm not willing to cross.
However, some of the ideas for this policy come from comments I've made.
But, for some reason those ideas are spun around to eliminate need,
instead of redefining need, which I think can gain community consensus.
I support a fundamental reexamination and redefinition of what justified
need means in a post (or nearly post) free pool world. But,
fundamentally there has to be need involved, the definition for that
need may look radically different than what we have used for the last 20
years or so.
I support redefining justified need for the transfer of a /24 and up to
a /20 as justified by an officer attestation that the resources are
needed for use on a operational network within 6 months and a
willingness to expend financial resources necessary to acquire the IPv4
resources on the transfer market. However, this is only one small part
of the reexamination and redefinition of justified need that is
necessary, but is seems like a reasonable bit size chunk to start with.
Some may argue that is the same thing that this policy does, and I must
disagree; This policy wants to eliminate needs justification, granted
only for small transfers. But it eliminates need none the less.
Where as what I'm suggesting fundamental redefines and simplifies what
justified need means in a post (or nearly post) free pool world for
small transfers, but does not eliminate need. Granted, I'm talking
about a fairly low bar being set. But there is a bar and it's not as
low as some may think. The fact that IPv4 resources have to be acquired
on the transfer market is accounted for as part of the demonstration of
need, this is a real constraint for most organizations. Furthermore,
the officer attestation requirement provides organizational commitment
that resources are going to be used and not just stockpiled.
I think the real problem this solves is failure of slow start when there
is no free pool to prime the pump.
So, unfortunately while this policy is at least partially based on my
suggestion, I can not support the problem statement given, nor can I
support the policy as written. Therefore, I suggest abandoning this
problem statement and policy, and starting over with a problem statement
focused on a different issue and not focusing on the elimination of need
at a solution.
On 5/16/14, 15:20 , ARIN wrote:
On 15 May 2014 the ARIN Advisory Council (AC) accepted "ARIN-prop-204
Removing Needs Test from Small IPv4 Transfers" as a Draft Policy.
Draft Policy ARIN-2014-14 is below and can be found at:
https://www.arin.net/policy/proposals/2014_14.html
You are encouraged to discuss the merits and your concerns of Draft
Policy 2014-14 on the Public Policy Mailing List.
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 PDP. Specifically, these principles are:
* Enabling Fair and Impartial Number Resource Administration
* Technically Sound
* Supported by the Community
The ARIN Policy Development Process (PDP) can be found at:
https://www.arin.net/policy/pdp.html
Draft Policies and Proposals under discussion can be found at:
https://www.arin.net/policy/proposals/index.html
Regards,
Communications and Member Services
American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN)
## * ##
Draft Policy ARIN-2014-14
Removing Needs Test from Small IPv4 Transfers
Date: 16 May 2014
Problem Statement:
ARIN staff, faced with a surge in near-exhaust allocations and
subsequent transfer requests and a requirement for team review of these,
is spending scarce staff time on needs testing of small transfers. This
proposal seeks to decrease overall ARIN processing time through
elimination of that needs test.
Policy statement:
Change the language in NRPM 8.3 after Conditions on the recipient of the
transfer: from "The recipient must demonstrate the need for up to a
24-month supply of IP address resources under current ARIN policies and
sign an RSA." to "For transfers larger than a /16 equivalent or for
recipients who have completed a needs-free transfer in the prior year,
the recipient must demonstrate the need for up to a 24-month supply of
IP address resources under current ARIN policies and sign an RSA."
Change the language in the third bullet point in NRPM 8.4 after
Conditions on the recipient of the transfer: from "Recipients within the
ARIN region must demonstrate the need for up to a 24-month supply of
IPv4 address space." to "For transfers larger than a /16 equivalent or
for recipients who have completed a needs-free transfer in the prior
year, recipients in the ARIN region must demonstrate the need for up to
a 24-month supply of IP address resources under current ARIN policies
and sign an RSA."
Comments:
Needs testing has been maintained for transfers largely because the
community wishes to ensure protection against hoarding and speculation
in the IPv4 market. This proposal seeks a middle ground between the
elimination of needs tests for transfers altogether, and the continuance
of needs tests for every transfer. This should help ARIN staff to reduce
transfer processing time, since most transfers have been smaller than /16.
Timetable for implementation: Immediate
--
================================================
David Farmer Email: [email protected]
Office of Information Technology
University of Minnesota
2218 University Ave SE Phone: 1-612-626-0815
Minneapolis, MN 55414-3029 Cell: 1-612-812-9952
================================================
_______________________________________________
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:
http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
Please contact [email protected] if you experience any issues.
