Meeting of the ARIN Advisory Council - 20 February 2025

Teleconference

Draft Minutes

These minutes are DRAFT. They have been reviewed by the ARIN Advisory Council prior to posting. These minutes will remain draft until they are reviewed and approved by the ARIN Advisory Council at their next regularly scheduled meeting.

ARIN AC Attendees:

  • Kat Hunter, Chair (KH)
  • Matthew Wilder, Vice Chair (MW)
  • Lily Botsyoe (LB)
  • Doug Camin (DC)
  • Gerry George (GG)
  • Elizabeth Goodson (EG)
  • William Herrin (WH)
  • Brian Jones (BJ)
  • Kendrick Knowles (KK)
  • Kaitlyn Pellak (KP)
  • Gus Reese (GR)
  • Leif Sawyer (LS)
  • Alicia Trotman (AT)
  • Alison Wood (AW)
  • Chris Woodfield (CW)

ARIN Staff:

  • Michael Abejuela, General Counsel
  • Eddie Diego, Policy Analyst
  • Richard Jimmerson, COO
  • Lisa Liedel, Dir., Registration Services
  • Therese Simcox, Sr. Exec. Assistant/Scribe

1. Welcome.

The Chair called the meeting to order at 4:04 p.m. ET. The Chair welcomed everyone to the call. The presence of a quorum was noted. It was noted that the President and the CXO were unable to attend due to conflicts.

2. Agenda Review.

The Chair reviewed the agenda with the Council and called for any comments. The COO requested time under any other business for one item, and the Chair agreed. She noted that the scheduled training will begin at 5:00 p.m. ET.

3. Approval of the Minutes.

(Exhibit A)

It was moved by CT, and seconded by DC, that:

“The ARIN Advisory Council approves the 24 January 2025 Minutes, as written.”

The Chair called for discussion. There were no comments.

The motion carried with no objections.

4. Draft Policy ARIN-2023-8: Reduce 4.1.8 Maximum Allocation.

GG stated that there were no changes, and the policy shepherds had planned to solicit more comments from Public Policy Mailing List (PPML), but after discussing it with Chair the suggestion is to rewrite and review the current policy to make it more relevant. They will have the Council review the edits and the NRPM WG as well will assist. That revised text will be presented at ARIN 55 for the community to weigh in on the direction of the policy. GG stated that rather than abandon the policy, we will try to rework text.

The Chair called for comments. She noted they were at an impasse on the policy, as some groups are for it and some are against it. She personally did not believe it needs a rewrite, but some last clarifications can be made on the text. It can be re-presented before the next meeting and pose the question as to whether the AC should continue working on it. The problem statement may not be relevant any longer as the waitlist time period has shortened. She noted that there will be a text freeze deadline in March, the NRPM WG will make it in time, but it definitely cannot wait longer than the deadline. GG noted the text freeze deadline is March 28 for ARIN 55, and agreed it should be able to get done.

The Chair asked the Policy Analyst to send a meeting invitation to GG on the NRPM WG’s meeting so that GG can attend.

5. Draft Policy ARIN-2024-5: Rewrite of NRPM Section 4.4 Micro-Allocation.

CW stated that the policy shepherds received feedback internally and externally, and emailed the community on potential changes made with regard to the feedback. One response has been received. He stated if there are no further responses in the next few days, he will propose the changes in revised text to the PPML.

6. Draft Policy ARIN-2024-7: Addition of Definitions for General and Special Purpose IP Addresses.

KP stated that this has not gained much traction from community, and she plans on reaching out and using language suggested by KH to see if the community believes the AC should continue working on it. KP hoped to receive feedback before the text freeze deadline. If not, she may consider abandonment.

7. Draft Policy ARIN-2024-10: Registration Requirements and Timing of Requirements with Retirement of Section 4.2.3.7.2.

AT stated that similar to KP’s policy, she has not received responses from the PPML. The shepherds will meet to discuss a path forward and post to the community to try to foster feedback and ask if this policy should continue to be worked on.

8. Draft Policy ARIN-2024-11: IPv4 Transition Efficiency Reallocation Policy (ITERP).

BJ stated that KP and he worked with the Policy Analyst and sent information to the PPML for feedback. They received one response against the policy and one in support of the policy. The author clarified information, and the shepherds continue to solicit input. The Chair stated that she expects more input will be forthcoming at ARIN 55.

9. Draft Policy ARIN-2025-1: Clarify ISP and LIR Definitions and References to Address Ambiguity in NRPM Text.

LS stated that he sent an update to the PPML and received one response regarding a typographical error, and a suggestion for removal of text that does not add to the policy. He removed that text. If there is no further feedback, he will consider resending the text to PPML for feedback looking for support, and present the policy at ARIN 55.

10. ARIN-prop-340: Clarify 8.5.1 Registration Services Agreement.

GR stated that this proposal was received a couple of weeks ago, and he has worked with one of the authors to edit the wording in the problem statement and updated it on the AC Wiki. He believed it was currently within scope and text is trying to solve a problem.

It was moved by GR, and seconded by AW, that:

“The ARIN Advisory Council accepts ‘ARIN-prop-340: Clarify 8.5.1 Registration Services Agreement’ as a Draft Policy.”

The Chair called for discussion. She clarified for the new AC members that whether you agree or not with a proposal, your thoughts can be stated when the proposal is in draft policy status. Once it is in the hands of the AC policy shepherds, that is when we determine if it is relevant and move it forward from there. The shepherds make revisions if needed when in draft policy status.

WH stated that the problem statement becomes frozen once moved to draft policy status and was concerned about the problem statement which he preferred be addressed before moving forward. He did not believe it reflected an understanding of why the text was the way it was before the proposed change.

MW stated that he provided a link to the Policy Development Process in the Zoom chat that explained the criteria to advance proposals forward. He explained that the AC is not agreeing to the problem statement at this time, the criteria is if the problem statement is clear. If we do not agree on the statement, we review and edit it when it is in draft policy status.

CW asked WH if his concern was that the origins and text was in Number Resource Policy Manual before, with no clear history. WH stated he was not sure about that, but the statement fails to address it, and he believed it should. CW explained that many times there is no clear history for previous revisions. He did not find it relevant, explaining that it is whether the problem statement is clear and does the text address it. WH stated he would be less concerned if text did not freeze as a consequence of the motion, but it does. His understanding is that once the proposal is accepted, the AC does not edit the problem statement. The Chair stated that as a general rule the AC does not change it. KK explained that clarifications can be made. The Chair stated that if you are editing the text, needed clarifications are acceptable. She further pointed out that there are areas in policies for comments and those comments show up in all presentations of policies. CW further explained the comments can be edited. WH appreciated all of the information.

GR provided a link of the history of the document in chat for the AC. He read the information to the Council for their edification. He noted the current RSA is in its 13th revision, and was unsure of the RSA version at the time the current language was codified in the NRPM in 2016. WH thanked him for the explanation. The Chair stated NRPM history is in bit bucket as well.

DC stated that as long as we do not change the intention of problem statement, editing it for clarity is acceptable. Our goal is to get proposals in front of community with technical soundness and that they meet criteria. Beyond that, we let the community decide. The Chair noted that there can also be instances of competing policies due to differences of opinions of problem statements.

CW clarified that challenging the legitimacy of a policy is not the AC’s job. It needs to be clear, and the community then decides if it is legitimate, valid, and reflects the changes the community supports. WH noted that he was only questioning completeness, not validity. AT also pointed out that in regard to finding the origin of text, staff can provide the background of the policy to make it clear to the AC.

The motion carried with all in favor, via roll call vote.

11. ARIN-prop-341: NRPM Section 9, Out of Region Use.

DC stated that this proposal was received 5 days ago. He and the policy co-shepherd did not have a chance to fully review the text, however, at a glance there will be adjustments to format it to policy areas that it will impact. He stated that he will work with author, and will look at moving the proposal forward at the next meeting.

12. ARIN AC Working Groups

  • Policy Experience Report Working Group (PER WG) Update. AW stated that one of the drafts discussed today came from this WG. She is working on items with leasing, and will discuss it at the next WG meeting in March. KP stated she would be happy to help with the leasing items and AW thanked her very much for her assistance.

  • Number Resource Policy Manual Working Group (NRPM WG) Update. BJ stated that the WG met and discussed an item that came from the legal review on one policy, and differences in Sections 4 and 6. There is work to do with 2024-8 and Section 6.

13. Any Other Business.

The Chair called for any other business items.

  • Changes in Employment and Affiliation. There were no changes reported.

  • ARIN 55: Charlotte, NC (April 27 – 30, 2025).

    • Registration opened on January 21.
    • Dates of stay are needed by March 21.


    (As the meeting gets closer, more meeting information will be found via the arin-announce mailing list and on this page: https://www.arin.net/participate/meetings/upcoming)

  • AC Public Speaking Training. The Chair stated that this training for the Council will begin after adjournment of this meeting. She stated the trainer from last year is available to conduct new training for the Council this time around.

  • ARIN Volunteer Code of Conduct. The COO stated that the Board reviewed and approved a new version of the volunteer code of conduct. He summarized the changes, and referred the AC to the new version posted to the ARIN website and to the AC wiki for more information.

The Chair stated that March 5 is the deadline to submit any staff and legal reviews before the next AC meeting on March 20th. Text freeze for the ARIN 55 discussion guide is March 8. She reiterated that if any draft policies need a staff and legal review, submit it the last week of February or the first week of March.

14. Adjournment.

The Chair entertained a motion to adjourn at 4:44 p.m. ET. LS moved to adjourn, seconded by AW. The meeting adjourned with no objections.

Related