Policy Experience Report Richard Jimmerson. Review existing policies – Ambiguous text/Inconsistencies/Gaps/Effectiveness Identify areas where new or modified.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
ARIN. San Francisco, CA ARIN VII April 1 – 4, 2001 The SWIP Template Tutorial Scott Whipple IP Analyst.
Advertisements

62 Recommended Draft Policy ARIN Resolve Conflict Between RSA and 8.2 Utilization Requirements.
1 Overview of policy proposals Policy SIG Wednesday 26 August 2009 Beijing, China.
ARIN Policy Experience Report Leslie Nobile. Review existing policies – Ambiguous text/Inconsistencies/Gaps/Effectiveness Identify areas where new or.
Improving 8.4 Anti-Flip Language. Problem Statement Current policy prevents an organization that receives BLOCK A in the previous 12 months from.
ARIN Transfer Policy Slow Start and Simplified Needs Verification.
Open Policy Hour. Overview 1.Preview of Draft Policies on ARIN XXV agenda 2.Policy Experience Report 3.Policy Proposal BoF.
Registration Services Department Update Leslie Nobile.
Registration Services Update Leslie Nobile. Current RSD Staff Total of 8 analysts currently – Cathy Clements, Principal Resource Analyst – Jon Worley,
IPv6 Addressing – Status and Policy Report Paul Wilson Director General, APNIC.
2010-8: Rework of IPv6 Assignment Criteria David Farmer ARIN XXVI.
Draft Policy ARIN : Modification to Criteria for IPv6 Initial End-User Assignments.
Policy Implementation and Experience Report Leslie Nobile.
Protecting Number Resources Draft Policy Advisory Council Shepherds: Marc Crandall Scott Leibrand.
Policy Proposal 109 Standardize IP Reassignment Registration Requirements ARIN XXV 18 April, 2010 – Toronto, Ontario Chris Grundemann.
Shepherd’s Presentation Draft Policy Allocation of IPv4 and IPv6 Address Space to Out-of-region Requestors 59.
Policy Implementation & Experience Report Leslie Nobile Director, Registration Services.
Registration Services Department Richard Jimmerson.
APNIC Policy Update 1 st TWNIC IP Open Policy Meeting 3 December, 2003 Taipei, Taiwan.
Open Policy Hour Einar Bohlin, Policy Analyst. OPH Overview Draft Policy Preview Policy Experience Report Policy BoF.
Draft Policy ARIN Resolve Conflict Between RSA and 8.2 Utilization Requirements.
POLICY EXPERIENCE REPORT Leslie Nobile. Review existing policies – Ambiguous text/Inconsistencies/Gaps/Effectiveness Identify areas where new or modified.
Getting Internet Number Resources from ARIN Community Use Slide Deck Courtesy of ARIN May 2014.
1 APNIC allocation and policy update JPNIC OPM July 17, Tokyo, Japan Guangliang Pan.
Draft Policy Standardize IP Reassignment Registration Requirements ARIN XXVI 6 October, 2010 – Atlanta, Georgia Chris Grundemann.
A proposal to lower the IPv4 minimum allocation size and initial criteria in the AP region prop-014-v001 Policy SIG APNIC17/APRICOT 2004 Feb
IP Policy in APNIC and What about TWNIC ? Kuo-Wei Wu.
Life After IPv4 Depletion Leslie Nobile. Overview ARIN’s current IPv4 inventory Trends and observations Ways to obtain IP addresses post IPv4 depletion.
Recommended Draft Policy ARIN Out of Region Use.
Policy Experience Report Leslie Nobile. The PDP Cycle Need Discuss Consensus Implement Evaluate
Policy Experience Report Leslie Nobile. Review existing policies – Ambiguous text/Inconsistencies/Gaps/Effectiveness Identify areas where new or modified.
ARIN Section 4.10 Austerity Policy Update.
PROP Leif Sawyer. Draft Policy ARIN Eliminating Needs-based Evaluation for Section 8.2, 8.3, and 8.4 transfers of IPv4 Netblocks Author:
ARIN Modify section 8.2 to better reflect how ARIN handles reorganizations.
AC On-Docket Proposals Report John Sweeting Advisory Council Chair.
John Curran APNIC 29 5 March 2010 ARIN Update. 4-byte ASN Stats In 2009 – Received 197 requests for 4-byte ASNs – 140 changed request to 2-byte – ARIN.
ARIN Policy and You What’s relevant (and what’s not!) to hosting providers.
Draft Policy Transfers & Multi-National Networks Kevin Blumberg.
Separate Assignment Policies for End-Users and ISPs Izumi Okutani Japan Network Information Center.
Policy Implementation & Experience Report Leslie Nobile.
ARIN Change Utilization Requirements from last-allocation to total-aggregate.
IP Addressing and ICT Development in the Pacific Islands Anne Lord and Save Vocea, APNIC ICT Workshop, Fiji, November, 2002.
Software Development Update Nate Davis, Chief Operating Officer.
Draft Policy ARIN : Remove NRPM section 7.1.
Regional Internet Registries Statistics & Activities Joint Techs Workshop July 2004 Columbus, OH.
ARIN Update Aaron Hughes ARIN Board of Trustees Focus Increased focus on customer service – Based on feedback and survey Continued IPv4 to IPv6.
1 Life After IPv4 Depletion Jon Worley –Analyst Leslie Nobile Senior Director Global Registry Knowledge.
Draft Policy ARIN Modify 8.4 (Inter-RIR Transfers to Specified Recipients) Authors: David Huberman and Tina Morris AC Shepherds: Cathy Aronson and.
Policy Experience Report Leslie Nobile. Review existing policies – Ambiguous text/Inconsistencies/Gaps/Effectiveness Identify areas where new or modified.
Registration Services Feedback Andrea Cima RIPE NCC RIPE 67 - Athens.
Registration Services Richard Jimmerson. RSD Team Transfer Services Manager Cathy Clements Resource Services Manager Lisa Liedel Technical Services Manager.
Draft Policy LIR/ISP and End-user Definitions.
Draft Policy Merge IPv4 ISP and End-User Requirements 59.
1 Madison, WI 9 September Part 1 IPv4 Depletion Leslie Nobile Director, Registration Services.
Registration Services Richard Jimmerson. RSD Core Functions IPv4, IPv6, and ASN requests Change of Authority Services – ORG & POC recovery – Transfers.
60 Recommended Draft Policy ARIN Reduce All Minimum Allocation/Assignment Units to /24.
60 Draft Policy ARIN NRPM 4 (IPv4) Policy Cleanup.
Whois & Data Accuracy Across the RIRs. Terms ISP – An Internet Service Provider is allocated address space by an RIR for the purpose of providing connectivity.
ARIN Update John Curran President and CEO, ARIN Focus IPv4 to IPv6 Transition Awareness – Targeting ISPs and Content Providers Continued enhancements.
Policy Implementation Report Leslie Nobile. Purpose Update the community on recently implemented policies Provide relevant operational details.
Draft Policy ARIN Christian Tacit. Problem statement Organizations that obtain a 24 month supply of IP addresses via the transfer market and then.
The Importance of Whois Accuracy Leslie Nobile
Recommended Draft Policy ARIN
Policy Experience Report
Recommended Draft Policy ARIN David Farmer
Policy Text Insert new section to NRPM to read as follows:
ARIN Scott Leibrand / David Huberman
Recommended Draft Policy ARIN : Post-IPv4-Free-Pool-Depletion Transfer Policy Staff Introduction.
Recommended Draft Policy ARIN Change timeframes for IPv4 requests to 24 months Tina Morris.
Recommended Draft Policy ARIN : Transfers for new entrants
Presentation transcript:

Policy Experience Report Richard Jimmerson

Review existing policies – Ambiguous text/Inconsistencies/Gaps/Effectiveness Identify areas where new or modified policy may be needed – Operational experience – Customer feedback Provide feedback to community and make recommendations when appropriate Purpose of Policy Experience Report 2

Subject Policies POC Validation 8.2 Transfers (Reorganizations) Experience with /24s Immediate Need 3

POC Validation NRPM 3.6 – Annual Whois POC Validation – – Method of Annual Verification During ARIN's annual Whois POC validation, an will be sent to every POC in the Whois database. Note: Points of Contact (POC) that receive ARIN validation are associated with: – POCs for direct assignments from ARIN – POCs for direct allocations from ARIN – POCs put on reassignments records by their ISPs 4

POC Validation For POCs associated with direct allocations/assignments from ARIN – Generally accepting and understanding of the process – Occasionally call help-desk with related questions For POCs only associated with reassignment records – Generally unhappy with the process – Generates multiple complaints per week – Generates requests for ARIN to remove their reassignment data and point of contact record from database – Issue : ARIN is not authorized to remove the reassignment records created by ISPs. 5

POC Validation Stats… – Nearly half of all helpdesk calls are related to POC validation – Average of 600 hostmaster s per month related to POC validation Issue – Creating a significant customer service concern for ARIN Considerations for potential policy changes – Not performing annual POC validation for POCs only associated with reassignment records? – Having ISPs perform annual POC validation for their reassignment blocks? – Having ISPs notify customers at reassignment of their contact obligations and annual validation? 6

8.2 Transfers (Reorganizations) NRPM 8.2. Mergers and Acquisitions ARIN will consider requests for the transfer of number resources in the case of mergers, acquisitions, and reorganizations under the following conditions: – The new entity must provide evidence that they have acquired assets that use the resources to be transferred from the current registrant. … 7

8.2 Transfers (Reorganizations) Problem – It is not clear to some customers that reorganizations are allowable for transfers (they don’t see it in the title) – Customers are confused by the requirement in bullet #1 (previous slide) for cases of reorganization Recommendation – Add “reorganizations” to policy title – Clarify that bullet #1 in policy does not apply to reorganizations 8

Experience with /24s ARIN’s minimum allocation/assignment size recently reduced to a /24 Existing requirements and criteria remained in place for both ISPs and end-users – These two circumstances have made it easy for end-user organizations to obtain a /24 from ARIN (probably intended) – These two circumstances have made the requirements for ISPs more difficult to meet than for end-users (probably not intended) 9

Experience with /24s Initial allocation to ISPs ISP Requirements All ISP organizations must satisfy the following requirements: Use of /24 The efficient utilization of an entire previously allocated /24 from their upstream ISP. This allocation may have been provided by an ISP’s upstream provider(s), and does not have to be contiguous address space. 10

Experience with /24s 4.3. End-users - Assignments to end-users Utilization rate Utilization rate of address space is a key factor in justifying a new assignment of IP address space. Requesters must show exactly how previous address assignments have been utilized and must provide appropriate details to verify their one-year growth projection. The basic criteria that must be met are: – A 25% immediate utilization rate, and – A 50% utilization rate within one year. 11

Experience with /24s Reassignments to multihomed downstream customers … “This policy allows a downstream customer's multihoming requirement to serve as justification for a /24 reassignment from their upstream ISP, regardless of host requirements.” … – Note that this policy allows “upstream ISP” organizations to use multi-homing needs of a customer as sole justification for /24. This policy does not allow ARIN to do the same. 12

Experience with /24s Status of /24 Requests – End-users seem ok with policy – ISPs are complaining that policy is simpler for end-users – Customers (both end-user and ISP) are complaining about non-applicability of the policy that allows upstream ISPs to use multi-homing as sole justification for a /24 – We are hearing from customers that many ISPs are now unwilling to reassign them a /24, citing either unavailability in their own inventory or the customer ability to now go to ARIN for that size prefix. Considerations for Potential Policy Changes – Allow ISPs to request /24s with the same ease as end-users? – Allow multi-homing to serve as sole justification for an IPv4 /24 from ARIN for both ISPs and end-user type organizations? 13

Immediate Need Immediate need – If an ISP has an immediate need for address space, and can provide justification to show that the address space will be utilized within 30 days of the request, ARIN may issue a block of address space, not larger than a /16 nor smaller than ARIN's customary minimum allocation, to that organization. These cases are exceptional. 14

Immediate Need Example Exceptional Cases ARIN Has Approved – Customer contracts as justification for services turned in within 30 days along with other supporting documentation – Migration of 911 services from a contractor to self-administered Example Cases ARIN Has Not Considered Exceptional – Very Common: Citing need to stage network equipment (and providing invoices to prove purchase) to serve future customer needs not within the next 30 days Considerations for Potential Policy Changes – Continue current practice of considering immediate need to be based on clear customer impact or other exceptional circumstances? – Make explicit in the policy that immediate need may be based on numbering new equipment? – Eliminate Immediate Need policy? 15