Meeting of the ARIN Advisory Council - 15 March 2018 [Archived]

Teleconference

Advisory Council Attendees:

• Tina Morris, Chair (TM)
• Leif Sawyer, Vice Chair (LS)
• Owen DeLong (OD)
• Andrew Dul (AD)
• David Farmer (DF)
• Alyssa Moore (AM)
• Amy Potter (AP)
• Joe Provo (JP)
• Kerrie Richards (KR)
• Rob Seastrom (RS)
• John Springer (JS)
• Chris Tacit (CT)
• Alicia Trotman (AT)
• Alison Wood (AW)

Scribe:

• Therese Simcox

ARIN Staff:

• Michael Abejuela (MA), Assoc. General Counsel
• John Curran, President & CEO
• Nate Davis (ND), COO
• Sean Hopkins (SHo), Policy Analyst
• John Sweeting (JSw), Senior Director, Registration Services

ARIN General Counsel

• Stephen M. Ryan, Esq.

Regrets

• Chris Woodfield

1. Welcome

The Chair called the meeting to order at 4:03 p.m. EDT. The presence of a quorum was noted.

2. Agenda Review

The Chair called for any comments on the agenda. There were none.

3. Approval of the Minutes

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

“The ARIN Advisory Council approves the Minutes of February 15, 2018, as written.”

The Chair called for discussion. There were no comments.

The motion carried with no objections.

4. Draft Policy ARIN-2017-3: Update to NRPM 3.6: Annual Whois POC Validation

AP stated that there have been no changes since the last AC teleconference. She hoped to move the policy forward for Board adoption, based on feedback from ARIN 41.

5. Draft Policy ARIN-2017-8: Amend the Definition of Community Network

DF stated that the policy is ready to be presented at ARIN 41. No changes have been made. He stated he would begin crafting the slides to present at ARIN 41.

6. Draft Policy ARIN-2017-9: Clarification of Initial Block Size for IPv4 ISP Transfers

DF stated that this policy will be presented as a draft policy at ARIN 41. He stated a better sense of what the community wants to do with it is needed. The Chair asked if DF was going to conduct straw polls at ARIN 41. He believed if proposal 252 becomes a draft policy, it could be discussed together with this policy, otherwise something else would need to be done. The Chair suggested being precise at the microphone when fielding questions, in lieu of conducting straw polls.

7. Draft Policy ARIN-2017-10: Repeal of Immediate Need for IPv4 Address Space

AD stated that the policy is ready to be presented at ARIN 41 and that he will start working on the presentation slides.

8. Proposed Editorial Change to Number Resource Policy Manual (Formerly: Draft Policy ARIN-2017-11: Reallocation and Reassignment Language Clean-up)

AM stated that the text is currently under community consultation review and that she will have more information when the review period is over on 23 March. She had no feedback to report at this time.

9. Draft Policy ARIN-2017-12: Require New POC Validation Upon Reassignment

CT stated that the staff and legal review was received with changes suggested. He reviewed them with the Council and stated that the changes have been made. He posted the updated edited text to the AC’s Wiki and also sent the text to the Public Policy Mailing List (PPML) for feedback. He hoped the text would be considered at ARIN 41 on equal footing with Recommended Draft Policy 2017-3.

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

“The ARIN Advisory Council recommends ‘Draft Policy ARIN-2017-12: Require New POC Validation Upon Reassignment’ for adoption.”

The Chair called for discussion. DF stated that it seemed, if presented with 2017-3, that CT meant that the two policies would be in opposition. He asked CT if they were not complementary policies. CT explained that he meant that the policies have the same subject matter and should be considered together. He did not mean in opposition. DF stated he understood and thanked CT for the clarification.

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

KR left the call due to technical difficulties (4:20 p.m.).

10. Draft Policy ARIN-2017-13: Remove ARIN Review Requirements for Large IPv4 Reassignments/Reallocations

JS stated that the policy satisfied the three criteria for moving from a draft policy to a recommended draft policy. He noted that the text is technically sound, fair and impartial, and has community support.

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

“The ARIN Advisory Council recommends ‘Draft Policy ARIN-2017-13: Remove ARIN Review Requirements for Large IPv4 Reassignments/Reallocations’ for adoption.”

The Chair called for discussion. JS noted that positive support has been received, and although support was not overwhelming, it was not uncommon. He briefed the AC on the feedback received on the PPML.

The motion carried with 12 in favor, via roll call vote.

AT joined the call at this time (4:33 p.m. EDT).

11. Draft Policy ARIN-2018-1: Allow Inter-Regional ASN Transfers

AW stated that she has posted the text with regard to 16-bit ASNs on the PPML and received feedback which was all positive, except for one. She noted that the staff and legal review was received and the review was clean.

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

“The ARIN Advisory Council recommends ‘Draft Policy ARIN-2018-1: Allow Inter-Regional ASN Transfers’ for adoption.”

The Chair called for discussion. AD stated that he recalled questions about IANA-level documentation records assigning blocks or ASNs to RIRs as a result of inter-region transfers. This was not noted in the staff and legal. He asked is it a moot point or to be resolved? AP stated that RIPE and APNIC are handling transfers and that a solution exists. AD asked if ARIN agreed if a solution exists.

The President stated that if one has an inter-RIR ASN transfer, one has to resolve where the transfer is being recorded, either by measures in each RIR, or at the IANA level - one or the other. He stated that at the IANA level, IANA would need to be involved in the flow for individual transfers, not just of blocks.

The issue can be solved, but inter-RIR ASN transfers will require a significant amount of work, no matter where they are addressed. They will be a heavier workload to implement and it will need to be undertaken if any inter-RIR ASN transfer policy is passed.

JSw clarified that the issue is addressed in staff and legal review. RPKI is resolved, but inter-RIR transfers would greatly complicate future the RPKI global trust anchor and processes would need to modified taking at least one to two months.

OD stated that his reading of the problem statement is that it is not clear if IANA will be involved in the process. RIPE and APNIC depend on Whois data with referrals through RDAP. This allows the IANA registry to be fictitious in content. He did not believe this was good idea, and it is not clear if we are asking them to update the data. He noted that these are open questions for a policy that is ’technically sound’. He stated he would vote against the motion.

The President agreed there were open questions. However, he noted that it is not clear whether or not ’no detail’ implementation is equivalent to a ’not technically sound’ policy. We have been working as a registry receiving blocks from IANA. We may be propagating a model less than ideal, but it can be done. It will get in the way of the global trust anchor for RPKI, if there is ever consensus to proceeding on deploying a single global trust anchor.

In summary, the Chair stated that there is work to be done. This may cause problems, but they will be worked to be resolved. The President noted that the technical soundness of the policy is ‘in the eye of each beholder’.

The motion failed with all against, via roll call vote.

JSw stated he would speak with the other RIRs, and would respond to the AC.

12. ARIN-Prop-251: Correct References to RWhois

OD stated that a motion in January was made to accept this proposal as an editorial change. Since that time, further changes were made to correct minor inconsistencies in the text.

It was moved by OD, and seconded by JP, that:

“The ARIN Advisory Council accepts ARIN-Prop-251: Correct References to RWhois as an editorial change.”

The Chair called for discussion. There were no comments.

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

13. ARIN-Prop-252: Clarification to ISP Initial Allocation and Permit Renumbering

RS stated that he has worked with the author - the policy statement remains the same but is now clarified. He stated that he had posted the text this morning to the AC’s mailing list for review.

It was moved by RS, and seconded by DF, that:

“The ARIN Advisory Council accepts ‘ARIN-Prop-252: Clarification to ISP Initial Allocation and Permit Renumbering’ as a Draft Policy.”

The Chair called for discussion. OD stated that he had not had the time to read the problem statement from the email sent this morning and was not prepared to vote on the proposal.

The Chair stated that since this is the AC’s last teleconference meeting before ARIN 41, she was moving forward with the vote and suggested that OD abstain.

The motion carried with 12 in favor, and one abstention (OD) via roll call vote. OD stated that he abstained due to the lack of time to read the problem statement.

14. Any Other Business

The Chair called for any other business.

ARIN-Prop-253

Remove Reallocation Requirements for Residential Market Assignments. The Chair stated that this is a new proposal to which shepherds had been assigned right before the meeting. She stated that JP and AM were the volunteers. Due to the Chair being out of country on business, the proposal had not been addressed earlier and she apologized for any delay.

ARIN 41 Preparation

The Chair reminded the AC to please craft their slides for ARIN 41 early and to please provide them to LS.

OD wanted to confirm that since Proposal 251 was editorial in nature, no slides would be needed. The Chair confirmed that was correct. The Chair stated that she would re-send slide template to the AC.

AC Mentors to ARIN Fellows.

AT asked what the AC Mentors needed to do with regard to the ARIN Fellows they were assigned who are attending ARIN 41. The Chair stated that the ARIN staff would contact the Mentors with information regarding the Fellows. JP stated that he had been contacted recently by ARIN staff, so they are beginning the process.

15. Adjournment

The Chair entertained a motion to adjourn at 4:47 p.m. EDT. OD moved to adjourn, seconded by JP. The meeting adjourned with no objections.