Draft Policy 2012-8 Aligning 8.2 and 8.3 Transfer Policy.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Policy Proposal Capturing Originations in Templates.
Advertisements

62 Recommended Draft Policy ARIN Resolve Conflict Between RSA and 8.2 Utilization Requirements.
Draft Policy Clarifying Requirements for IPv4 Transfers.
Improving 8.4 Anti-Flip Language. Problem Statement Current policy prevents an organization that receives BLOCK A in the previous 12 months from.
1 Draft Policy Globally Coordinated Transfer Policy Original Authors: Chris Grundeman, Martin Hannigan, Jason Schiller AC Shepherds: Bill Darte,
Recommended Draft Policy Section 8.4 Inter-RIR Transfer of ASNs.
60 Recommended Draft Policy ARIN Anti-hijack Policy.
DRAFT POLICY ARIN : NEEDS ATTESTATION FOR SOME IPV4 TRANSFERS John Springer.
ARIN Clarifying Requirements for IPv4 Transfers Dan Alexander- Primary Shepherd David Farmer- Secondary Shepherd.
Customer Confidentiality Draft Policy Origin (Proposal 95)9 June 2009 Draft Policy (successfully petitioned) 2 February 2010 Aaron Wendel has.
Update on RIPE NCC Inter- RIR Transfer proposal Adam Gosling APNIC 38 Policy SIG Meeting 18 September 2014.
Protecting Number Resources Draft Policy Advisory Council Shepherds: Marc Crandall Scott Leibrand.
Public Policy Consultation 2 An open public discussion of Internet number resource policy held by ARIN facilitating in-person and remote participation.
63 Recommended Draft Policy ARIN Out of Region Use.
Draft Policy ARIN Resolve Conflict Between RSA and 8.2 Utilization Requirements.
Standardize IP Reassignment Registration Requirements Draft Policy
1 Madison, Wisconsin 9 September14. 2 ARIN’s Policy Development Process Current Number Resource Policy Discussions and How to Participate John Springer.
Recommended Draft Policy ARIN Out of Region Use.
Draft Policy Revising Section 4.4 C/I Reserved Pool Size.
Simplified M&A transfer policy Draft Policy
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.
Recommended Draft Policy ARIN Remove Operational Reverse DNS Text.
Advisory Council Shepherds: Marc Crandall & Scott Leibrand Combined M&A and Specified Transfers.
AC On-Docket Proposals Report John Sweeting AC Chair.
Draft Policy ARIN “Out of Region Use”. Problem statement (summary) Current policy neither clearly forbids nor clearly permits out of region use.
Draft Policy Returned IPv4 Addresses 1.History including origin & shepherds 2.Summary 3.Status at other RIRs 4.Staff/legal assessment 5.PPML discussion.
Recommended Draft Policy ARIN Remove Web Hosting Policy.
Draft Policy IPv6 Subsequent Allocations Utilization Requirement.
Draft Policy Allocation of IPv4 and IPv6 Address Space to Out-of-region Requestors 59.
Draft Policy Protecting Number Resources 1.History including origin & shepherds 2.Summary 3.Status at other RIRs 4.Staff/legal assessment 5.PPML.
Draft Policy IPv6 Subsequent Allocations Utilization Requirement.
Waiting List For Unmet IPv4 Requests Draft Policy
ARIN Allow Inter-RIR ASN Transfers. Problem Statement We already allow transfer of ASNs within the ARIN region. Recently APNIC implemented a policy.
Draft Policy Return to 12 Month Supply and Reset Trigger to /8 in Free Pool.
Draft Policy Globally Coordinated Transfer Policy 1.History including origin & shepherds 2.Summary 3.Status at other RIRs 4.Staff/legal assessment.
Draft Policy ARIN Modify 8.4 (Inter-RIR Transfers to Specified Recipients) Authors: David Huberman and Tina Morris AC Shepherds: Cathy Aronson and.
Rework of IPv6 Assignment Criteria Draft Policy
Recommended Draft Policy ARIN Out of Region Use Milton Mueller, Tina Morris AC Shepherds Presented by David Farmer.
Draft Policy IPv6 Subsequent Allocations Utilization Requirement.
Draft Policy Reassignments for Third Party Internet Access (TPIA) over Cable.
Allocation of IPv4 Blocks to Regional Internet Registries (Global Proposal) Draft Policy
Draft Policy Removal of Renumbering Requirement for Small Multihomers.
Recommended Draft Policy RIR Principles 59.
Advisory Council Shepherds: David Farmer & Chris Grundemann Global Policy for post exhaustion IPv4 allocation mechanisms by the IANA.
60 Draft Policy ARIN Improving 8.4 Anti-Flip Language.
60 Recommended Draft Policy ARIN Reduce All Minimum Allocation/Assignment Units to /24.
ARIN Leif Sawyer. Draft Policy ARIN Eliminating Needs-based Evaluation for Section 8.2, 8.3, and 8.4 transfers of IPv4 Netblocks Author:
60 Draft Policy ARIN NRPM 4 (IPv4) Policy Cleanup.
Prop 182 Update Residential Customer Definition to Not Exclude Wireless as Residential Service.
Draft Policy Compliance Requirement History 1.Origin: ARIN-prop-126 (Jan 2011) 2.AC Shepherds: Chris Grundemann, Owen DeLong 3.AC selected.
Draft Policy Better IPv6 Allocations for ISPs 1.History including origin & shepherds 2.Summary 3.Status at other RIRs 4.Staff/legal assessment 5.PPML.
Draft Policy ARIN Christian Tacit. Problem statement Organizations that obtain a 24 month supply of IP addresses via the transfer market and then.
Recommended Draft Policy ARIN
59 Draft Policy Allocation of IPv4 and IPv6 Address Space to Out-of-region Requestors.
Recommended Draft Policy ARIN David Farmer
Returned IPv4 Addresses
Draft Policy ARIN Amy Potter
Required Resource Reviews
Recommended Draft Policy ARIN : Post-IPv4-Free-Pool-Depletion Transfer Policy Staff Introduction.
IPv6 Subsequent Allocation
Draft Policy ARIN Cathy Aronson
Draft Policy Shared Transition Space for IPv4 Address Extension
ARIN New MDN allocation based on past utilization
Recommended Draft Policy ARIN : Eliminate HD-Ratio from NRPM
Recommended Draft Policy Section 8
Permitted Uses of space reserved under NRPM 4.10
ARIN Inter-RIR Transfers
Recommended Draft Policy ARIN : Modify 8
Recommended Draft Policy ARIN : Transfers for new entrants
Presentation transcript:

Draft Policy Aligning 8.2 and 8.3 Transfer Policy

History 1.Origin: ARIN-prop-175 (Jun 2012) 2.AC Shepherds: Chris Grundemann, David Farmer 3.Current version: 5 September Text and assessment online & in Discussion Guide 2

– Summary This draft policy attempts to align 8.2 transfers with 8.3 and 8.4 transfers by adding some additional common criteria to 8.2. It codifies the minimum size of address blocks that can be transferred; it requires the recipient of a transfer to sign an RSA; and it codifies the requirement that the source entity of the transfer be the current registrant and not be engaged in a dispute over the registration rights. 3

– Status at other RIRs No similar proposals/discussions. 4

– Staff Assessment Staff Comments: Issues/Concerns? No comments as previous comments were addressed. Implementation: Resource Impact? – Minimal (3 mos.) – Updated guidelines and staff training 5

– Legal Assessment Any change in NPRM 8.2 requires heightened legal scrutiny because literally hundreds of different disparate proposed 8.2 acquisitions may be considered within the next several years under the changed language. I have these comments. – First, the use of RSA in this case may need to permit issuance of an LRSA, if the resources are legacy addresses that have not previously been the subject of an RSA. – Second, the following new language needs careful community review: "The new entity (recipient) must provide evidence that they have acquired assets that use the resources transferred from the current registrant (source entity) such that their continued need is justified. ARIN will maintain an up-to-date list of acceptable types of documentation" Counsel believes this proposed language requires the 8.2 recipient to demonstrate that the number resources are part of an ongoing business that is being sold, and that the number resources are utilized by the business. It would be unwise to adopt language in 8.2 that would arguably permit an 8.2 transfer where the number resources are the only genuinely valuable asset of the business that has any material monetary value. If the number resources are the only genuinely valuable remaining material assets of the prior business which is now defunct, the transfer has to be considered under NPRM 8.3, not 8.2. If the community agrees that is the case, the language does not pose problematic legal issues. 6

– PPML Discussion 1 post by 1 person (0 in favor and 0 against) – No comments 7

Draft Policy Aligning 8.2 and 8.3 Transfer Policy