Meeting of the ARIN Advisory Council - 09 November 2001 [Archived]

Teleconference

Attendees:

• Alec Peterson, Chairman
• Steve Corbato (arrived at 6:20 pm)
• Bill Darte
• Ron Roberts
• Barbara Roseman
• John Sweeting
• Richard Jimmerson, ARIN Director of Operations
• Susan Hamlin, Recording Secretary
• Absent: Avi Freedman, Mark Kosters, Tony Li, Bill Manning, Kevin Martin, Jeremy Porter, Cathy Wittbrodt

Advisory Council Chairman Alec Peterson called the meeting to order at 2:10 PM. Roll call attendance was taken and the presence of a quorum was noted. The agenda was reviewed and adopted.

Policy Proposal 2001 -2 : Multihoming is sufficient justification for /24 from a provider

Barbara Roseman summarized the feedback on the mailing list since the proposal was posted with several amendments after the October Public Policy meetings. After some discussion, the Advisory Council based on the mailing list input, agreed to amend the proposed language.

Bill Darte moved that the Advisory Council, based on community consensus, recommend the following language to the Board of Trustees and put it out for last call on the Public Policy mailing list:

A downstream customer’s multihoming requirement will serve as justification for a /24 reassignment from their upstream ISP regardless of host requirements.

-Customer must provide contact information for their upstream providers
-Customer may receive space from only one of its upstream providers without additional justification

Barbara Roseman seconded the motion. There being no further discussion, a roll call vote was called. The motion passed by unanimous vote.

Action Item: ARIN staff was directed to send out a last call for comments on Policy Proposal 2001-2.

Policy Proposal 2001-6 : Single organizations with multi-homed discrete networks

John Sweeting summarized the mailing list discussion on the proposal that has taken place since the October 28-30 ARIN Public Policy and Members meetings.

Barbara Roseman moved that the Advisory Council accept the proposed changes to the proposal, based on mailing list comments, and that the proposal move forward in the policy evaluation process. The proposed language is as follows:

ARIN currently has an allocation policy that is ‘blind’ to route Filtering and global routablity, yet in order for address space to be usable it must be accepted and routed by the community at large.

This fact can create allocation concerns for organizations that have multiple discrete multi-homed networks. Organizations may design their networks in this manner for a number of reasons including regulatory restrictions (Federal FCC mandated inter-lata restrictions), geographic diversity/distance between networks, and routing policy.

Current RIR allocation policy requires that before a single organization can obtain additional address space it must show 80% utilization (through SWIP or rWhois) per RFC 2050.

Currently, some organizations have circumvented this requirement by Creating “multiple maintainers” with ARIN and request address space for networks as though they were separate organizations. This practice creates both practical and financial concerns for ARIN. In practice it appears that organizations can just ‘buy’ additional address space without regard to utilization on other networks and this in turn increases ARIN’s revenue dependence on a small number of organizations.

Current allocation requirements can become unreasonable when operating a set of discrete networks for organizations which intend on following the current allocations policy. Discrete networks must often have separate unique globally routable address space and will often grow at different rates. This growth differential can lead to a situation where one discrete network is completely allocated but another network has not yet been fully utilized.

Under the current allocation policy the organization would need to Request additional address space from the RIR; however, given a strict interpretation of the existing policy, the RIR may not be able to grant additional address space to the organization, due to the 80% utilization requirement.

This constraint can easily be seen when you consider an organization with two geographically discrete autonomous networks. The organization initially requested a /19 from the RIR for its two networks with the intent to route a single /20 from each network. Network A’s utilization grows considerably faster than Network B. Network A is currently showing 90% utilization and needs additional address space for new customers being added to this network. Network B’s address space is being utilized but currently only shows 40% utilization. This would produce an allocation utilization percentage of 65% which is below the requirement for additional address space by a RIR.

We propose for organizations which meet the following criteria to be granted the opportunity to request additional address space under the requirements listed below.

Criteria for the application of this policy:

* The organization should be a single entity, and not a consortium of smaller independent entities. (Example: Not a group of independent network operators who form a group specifically for this policy)

* This policy applies only to organizations that have been previously granted address space by an RIR. This policy does not apply to organizations with only legacy address space.

* The organization must have multiple (at least two) discrete multi-homed networks.

* The organization should have a compelling criteria for creating discret networks.

Examples:

1. regulatory restrictions for data transmission
2. geographic distance and diversity between networks
3. autonomous multi-homed discrete networks

* An organization which would like to use this policy must apply for this policy to be applied to their maintainer account.

* Current members presently managing multiple maintainer accounts should contact the ARIN Hostmaster if they wish for this policy to apply to one or more of their current accounts.

Requirements for additional allocations from RIR:

* The organization must record allocations or assignments down to the current RIR bit boundary (currently /29 for ARIN) and record them in an approved RIR public database.

* The organization must keep detailed records of how it has allocated space to each discrete network. This should include the block allocated, any reserved blocks, and date of allocation/reservation. The discrete network allocation information should also be present in a public database (Example: routing registry, rWhois, or SWIP).

* The organization must not allocate additional space to a discrete network unless all the blocks allocated to that network show utilization greater than 80% individually and as a whole.

* The organization must not allocate a CIDR block larger than the current minimum assignment size of the RIR (currently /20 for ARIN) to a new network.

* The organization must not allocate an additional CIDR block larger than the current minimum assignment size of the RIR (currently /20 for ARIN) to an existing network, unless previous growth rates for that network indicate that it is likely to utilize a larger CIDR block before the time the organization will be requesting an additional block from the RIR. The suggested minimum allocation size for an additional block for a network is the current minimum assignment size of the RIR.

* When allocating a block larger than the minimum assignment size to an existing network the organization should use the smallest allocation possible out of a larger reserved block. This requirement is to reduce the number of routes the organization will announce from that autonomous system. Example: A fast growing network is allocated a /20 out of a reserved /19, when the /20 is 80% utilized the announcement is expanded to a /19 and the /20 announcement is removed. This practice also allows the reserved /20 to be used by another discrete network should the ‘fast growing network’ not use the address space as anticipated.

* When applying for additional address space, from an RIR, for new networks or additional space for existing networks the organization must show greater than 50% utilization for the last block granted by the RIR and their allocations as a whole. Any reserved blocks must be allocated to a discrete network before the RIR will grant additional address space.

* The organization must follow guidelines of RFC 2050 (or its replacement)and the policy of the granting RIR for allocations that are assigned or allocated to downstream networks. This includes record keeping of allocation and reassignment requests and network utilization documents for audits by the RIR.

Action Item: The Advisory Council asked the President to send out a last call for comments on Policy Proposal 2001-6.

Ron Roberts seconded the motion. There being no further discussion, a roll call vote was called. The motion passed unanimously.

Barbara Roseman moved that the meeting be adjourned at 2:30 PM. Alec Peterson seconded the motion and by unanimous agreement the meeting adjourned.