Meeting of the ARIN Advisory Council - 19 September 2019 [Archived]

OUT OF DATE?

Here in the Vault, information is published in its final form and then not changed or updated. As a result, some content, specifically links to other pages and other references, may be out-of-date or no longer available.

Teleconference

Attendees:

  • Tina Morris, Chair (TM)
  • Leif Sawyer, Vice Chair (LS)
  • Owen DeLong (OD)
  • Andrew Dul (AD)
  • David Farmer (DF)
  • Kat Hunter (KH)
  • Alyssa Moore (AM)
  • Joe Provo (JP)
  • Rob Seastrom (RS)
  • Chris Tacit (CT)
  • Alicia Trotman (AT)
  • Alison Wood (AW)

Scribe:

  • Therese Simcox

ARIN Staff:

  • Michael Abejuela (MA), Associate General Counsel
  • Sean Hopkins (SH), Policy Analyst
  • Richard Jimmerson (RJ), COO

Regrets

  • Amy Potter
  • Kerrie Richards
  • Chris Woodfield

1. Welcome

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

2. Agenda Review

The Chair reviewed the Agenda and called for any comments. The Chair noted that there is one more AC teleconference before ARIN 44 for the AC to items in order before the meeting.

3. Approval of the Minutes

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

“The ARIN Advisory Council approves the Minutes of 15 August 2019, as written.”

The Chair called for any objections. There were no comments.

The motion carried with no objections.

AM stated that this policy is ready to be presented at ARIN 44 in October, and there have been no changes.

KH stated that this policy is ready to be presented at ARIN 44 in October, and there have been no changes.

AT stated that this policy is ready to be presented at ARIN 44 in October, and there have been no changes.

7. Draft Policy ARIN-2019-4: Allow Inter-Regional IPv6 Resource Transfers

JP stated there has been no ‘traction’ on this topic within the community, and noted that this topic has been included in another policy on the AC’s docket (2019-10). The author has been sent the intention to abandon, but has been unresponsive to date. JP stated that he was disinclined to abandon this policy at this time until he hears from the author. JP suggested waiting to abandon the policy until AC’s next teleconference.

OD stated that he understood JP’s point, but he believed it was prudent to abandon this policy at this time, rather than right before the ARIN 44 Public Policy Meeting (PPM). OD believed that the author has had plenty of time to respond. He believed the author’s silence on the matter should be viewed as consent with regard to abandoning the policy.

The Chair asked the policy shepherds if this policy were to be resurrected, did they believe the author would want it to proceed? JP did not believe so. JP spoke to OD’s point, stating that the inclination to abandon was raised on the Public Policy Mailing List (PPML), but that Draft Policy 2019-10 is the stronger policy. JP stated that, given this, he believed that this policy being 13 days on the PPML was sufficient time to garner any feedback; and, he stated that he could be persuaded to abandon the policy at this time. He asked if this was considered premature?

The Chair did not believe this was a premature decision, agreeing with the sufficiency of the timeline. JP reversed his decision and stated he would support abandoning this policy.

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

“The ARIN Advisory Council abandons ‘Draft Policy ARIN-2019-4: Allow Inter-Regional IPv6 Resource Transfers’.”

The Chair called for discussion. DF joined at this time 4:11 pm EDT. The Chair asked DF, the co-shepherd on this policy, his thoughts on abandoning it. DF stated that he too believed the decision to abandon at this time was in order.

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

OD stated that this policy is ready to be presented at ARIN 44, and that there have been no changes.

9. Draft Policy ARIN-2019-9: Clarify Interactions between NRPM 4.5 IPv6 Transition Space Requests and NRPM 4.1.8.2 Unmet Needs Requests

KH stated that after the staff and legal review was conducted, at the last AC meeting abandoning this policy was discussed. She noted that there is no support for this policy on the PPML.

It was moved by KH and seconded by AD, that:

“The ARIN Advisory Council abandons ‘Draft Policy ARIN-2019-9: Clarify Interactions between NRPM 4.5 IPv6 Transition Space Requests and NRPM 4.1.8.2 Unmet Needs Requests’.”

The Chair called for discussion. There were no comments.

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

10. Draft Policy ARIN-2019-10: Inter-RIR M&A

RS stated that this is the better of the two policies (the other being 2019-4 which was just abandoned).

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

“The ARIN Advisory Council moves ‘Draft Policy ARIN-2019-10: Inter-RIR M&A’ to Recommended Draft Policy status.”

The Chair called for discussion. RS stated that there was not much discussion on the PPML, but noted that can be said of all the policies currently open. RS hoped that a robust discussion will take place at ARIN 44.

The motion carried with 10 in favor and two against (AD, DF) via roll call vote.

The Chair asked if the two against wanted to add any comments. AD stated that he did not see a sufficient level of community support at this time to move this policy forward. DF stated that he agreed with AD.

11. Draft Policy ARIN-2019-11: M&A Regional Nexus Exclusion

RS stated that this policy had even less support than most, and he noted that JP had asked the one person who voiced opposition to it, to expand on why they were against it. They did not provide a response. In light of this, RS stated he would make a motion to abandon this policy to facilitate discussion of the fact that it has no support.

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

“The ARIN Advisory Council abandons ‘Draft Policy ARIN-2019-11: M&A Regional Nexus Exclusion’.”

The Chair called for discussion. There were no comments.

The motion carried with 8 in favor, and 4 against (DF, AM, CT, TM).

RS stated he would post a message to the PPML. The Chair asked AC to please speak up in the future if they have any comments either for or against a policy.

JP stated that there has been support seen on the PPML, albeit less than other policies, and pointed out that staff feedback indicated that this draft policy would be codifying ARIN practice.

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

“The ARIN Advisory Council moves ‘Draft Policy ARIN-2019-12: M&A Legal Jurisdiction Exclusion’ to Recommended Draft Policy status.”

The Chair called for discussion. DF stated that he supported this policy, but had one clarification: in this situation, an organization that is no longer in the region can maintain what resources they have, but they cannot obtain additional resources – is that correct? The COO responded that if the organization has other resources in use in the region (a /22), they would qualify. DF noted that this policy does not state that can happen. The COO stated that currently if they request resources but do not have a legal presence in the region, ARIN would not fulfill their request. DF stated that he was supportive of the motion, but believed the policy could be interpreted as saying an organization could obtain more resources.

OD stated that he is opposing the motion since it is a no-op, and would have benefit if it had clarity. OD believed that DF seemed to say the text is ambiguous. OD stated in his opinion is not a ‘win’. OD believed the text should be clarified, and the policy should not move forward at this time.

AD agreed with OD, noting that the staff and legal review was not posted to the PPML for comment. He stated he would like the community to weigh in on the matter before moving the policy forward.

SH stated for clarity that staff and legal reviews are only posted to the ARIN website. He suggested the AC could point to the ARIN URL on the PPML so that interested people could read it.

JP stated that the policy had received positive feedback and there were no requests for clarity.

The motion to move to recommended draft policy failed with 11 against, and one in favor (JP), via roll call vote.

The Chair requested that JP send a note to the PPML to ascertain if the community needed clarity.

AT stated that AP had sent her regrets for today’s meeting, but stated in an email to the AC that she was sending an announcement to the PPML to give notice of her intent to abandon this draft policy. AT further stated that AP notified the AC that she will make a motion to abandon this policy at the AC’s next meeting in October, and that AP does not support this policy being presented to the community at ARIN 44.

OD stated that abandonment before an ARIN PPM is not favorable, and there has been ample time on the PPML for consideration. OD preferred to abandon the policy at this time. He did not want to usurp the policy shepherd’s decision, but he did want to move to abandon this policy now.

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

“The ARIN Advisory Council abandons ‘Draft Policy ARIN-2019-13: ARIN Membership Legal Jurisdiction Exclusion’.”

The Chair called for discussion. OD stated that while he does not like abandoning a policy without posting the intention to the PPML first, he believes that abandoning a policy right before an ARIN PPM is worse.

AT stated the reason not to abandon this policy is because there has been no notification to the community, but she did understand OD’s point. AT stated that she was against abandoning the policy at this time.

CT stated that apathy by the majority should not necessarily dictate the disposition of this matter if it affects a particular part of the community.

The motion to abandon the policy failed, with 10 against and two in favor (OD, DF), via roll call vote.

AP stated that she will post the staff and legal review to the PPML, along with the suggestion DF proposed.

CT stated that this policy is ready to be presented at ARIN 44, and there have been no changes.

15. Draft Policy ARIN-2019-17: Returned Addresses to the 4.10 Reserved Pool

AW stated that she has updated this policy’s problem statement to indicate that it would: a) eliminate waitlist and, b) grandfather in those currently awaiting segments on the waiting list. She noted that there have been passionate comments on the PPML, mostly negative but some positive. She stated that she would like to present this policy at ARIN 44 for more community feedback, and also to request a staff and legal review She asked the Chair if this was possible.

The Chair agreed with AW’s idea, and stated that she will request the staff and legal review.

16. Any Other Business

The Chair called for any other business items.

ARIN 44 Slide Template

The Chair noted that SH had sent the slide template to the AC earlier today, and that they should feel free to work on slides sooner rather than later for ARIN 44.

ARIN-Prop-277: LIR/ISP Re-Assignment to Non-Connected Networks

RS noted that the policy shepherds have been assigned to this new proposal (himself and AM). He asked the Chair if it would be out of order move the proposal to draft policy at this time. The Chair replied that she would allow it, noting that she preferred it had been mentioned earlier in the agenda.

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

“The ARIN Advisory Council accepts ‘ARIN-Prop-277: LIR/ISP Re-Assignment to Non-Connected Networks’ as a Draft Policy.”

The Chair called for discussion. The Chair asked the AC if they had enough time to review the proposal to be comfortable enough to vote on it at this time. It was asked of RS to provide a brief summary of the proposal to the AC, and he did so. OD stated he was comfortable voting on it, as was AM.

Hearing no objections, the Chair called the vote.

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

17. Adjournment

The Chair entertained a motion to adjourn at 4:35 p.m. EDT. OD moved to adjourn, and seconded by JP. The meeting adjourned with no objections.

OUT OF DATE?

Here in the Vault, information is published in its final form and then not changed or updated. As a result, some content, specifically links to other pages and other references, may be out-of-date or no longer available.