Yes that is exactly what it means. After approval they decided for whatever reason they no longer wanted the resource.
Sent from my iPhone > On Apr 16, 2020, at 1:56 AM, John Santos <[email protected]> wrote: > > What does "closed with no action" mean? Does it mean the RSP abandoned the > request? > > >> On 4/15/2020 7:18 PM, John Sweeting wrote: >> Hi Andrew, >> >> The numbers around this are: >> >> 320 3x small RSPs >> 30 have applied and been approved for IPv6 of which 26 closed with no action >> to complete by the requester. The other 4 are currently still open and >> pending action. >> >> Thanks, >> John S. >> >> On 4/15/20, 11:30 AM, "Andrew Dul" <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> John, >> Could you provide the community with a rough magnitude of this >> issue? >> Approximately how many of these 3x-small ISP organizations have >> come to >> ARIN and requested IPv6? How many accepted the block and how many >> refused because of the fee issue? How many 3x-small ISP organizations >> does ARIN currently serve. >> Thanks, >> Andrew >> On 4/14/2020 2:29 PM, John Sweeting wrote: >> > All, >> > >> > For anyone interested in the content of the "Policy Experience Report >> presented by Registration >> > Services to the AC at its annual workshop in January 2020" referenced >> in the problem statement you can see that report here: >> > >> > >> https://www.arin.net/about/welcome/ac/meetings/2020_0124/policy_experience_report.pdf >> > >> > Thank you. >> > >> > On 3/24/20, 1:22 PM, "ARIN-PPML on behalf of ARIN" >> <[email protected] on behalf of [email protected]> wrote: >> > >> > On 19 March 2020, the ARIN Advisory Council (AC) accepted >> > "ARIN-prop-285: IPv6 Nano-allocations" as a Draft Policy. >> > >> > Draft Policy ARIN-2020-3 is below and can be found at: >> > >> > https://www.arin.net/participate/policy/drafts/2020_3/ >> > >> > 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-2020-3: IPv6 Nano-allocations >> > >> > Problem Statement: >> > >> > ARIN's fee structure provides a graduated system wherein >> organizations >> > pay based on the amount of number resources they consume. >> > >> > In the case of the very smallest ISPs, if a 3X-Small ISP (with a >> /24 or >> > smaller of IPv4) gets the present minimal-sized IPv6 allocation (a >> /36), >> > its annual fees will double from $250 to $500/year. >> > >> > According to a Policy Experience Report presented by Registration >> > Services to the AC at its annual workshop in January 2020, this >> > represents a disincentive to IPv6 adoption with a substantial >> fraction >> > of so-situated ISPs saying "no thanks" and abandoning their >> request for >> > IPv6 number resources when informed of the impact on their annual >> fees. >> > >> > This can be addressed by rewriting subsection 6.5.2(b). Initial >> > Allocation Size to allow allocation of a /40 to only the smallest >> ISPs >> > upon request, and adding a new clause 6.5.2(g) to cause an >> automatic >> > upgrade to at least a /36 in the case where the ISP is no longer >> 3X-Small. >> > >> > Reserving /40s only for organizations initially expanding into >> IPv6 from >> > an initial sliver of IPv4 space will help to narrowly address the >> > problem observed by Registration Services while avoiding unintended >> > consequences by accidentally giving a discount for undersized >> allocations. >> > >> > Policy Statement: >> > >> > Replace the current 6.5.2(b) with the following: >> > >> > b. In no case shall an LIR receive smaller than a /32 unless they >> > specifically request a /36 or /40. >> > >> > In order to be eligible for a /40, an ISP must meet the following >> > requirements: >> > * Hold IPv4 direct allocations totaling a /24 or less (to >> include zero) >> > * Hold IPv4 reassignments/reallocations totaling a /22 or less >> (to >> > include zero) >> > >> > In no case shall an ISP receive more than a /16 initial allocation. >> > >> > Add 6.5.2(g) as follows: >> > >> > g. An LIR that requests a smaller /36 or /40 allocation is >> entitled to >> > expand the allocation to any nibble aligned size up to /32 at any >> time >> > without renumbering or additional justification. /40 allocations >> shall >> > be automatically upgraded to /36 if at any time said LIR's IPv4 >> direct >> > allocations exceed a /24. Expansions up to and including a /32 are >> not >> > considered subsequent allocations, however any expansions beyond >> /32 are >> > considered subsequent allocations and must conform to section >> 6.5.3. >> > Downgrades of any IPv6 allocation to less than a /36 are not >> permitted >> > regardless of the ISP's current or former IPv4 number resource >> holdings. >> > >> > Comments: >> > >> > The intent of this policy proposal is to make IPv6 adoption at the >> very >> > bottom end expense-neutral for the ISP and revenue-neutral for >> ARIN. The >> > author looks forward to a future era wherein IPv6 is the dominant >> > technology and IPv4 is well in decline and considered optional >> leading >> > the Community to conclude that sunsetting this policy is prudent >> in the >> > interests of avoiding an incentive to request undersized IPv6 >> allocations. >> > >> > Timetable for implementation: Immediate >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > 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. >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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. > > -- > John Santos > Evans Griffiths & Hart, Inc. > 781-861-0670 ext 539 > > _______________________________________________ > 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.
