Cathy, I actually find it reasonable that the live connectivity be the prerequisite for requesting space under 4.5.
Thanks, Jeff On Wed, Mar 5, 2014 at 10:42 PM, CJ Aronson <c...@daydream.com> wrote: > Jeffrey, > > The text was changed from "Upon verification that the organization has > already obtained connectivity at its new discrete network site" because > folks felt that this meant the connection had to be up and running, not just > under contract. I believe there is more justification required than just > "having a new site". I see nothing in the current policy that states an > automatic /24. Here is the policy text as it stands today from NRPM (see > below) > > Thanks! > ----Cathy > > 4.5. Multiple Discrete Networks > > Organizations with multiple discrete networks desiring to request new or > additional address space under a single Organization ID must meet the > following criteria: > > The organization shall be a single entity and not a consortium of smaller > independent entities. > The organization must have compelling criteria for creating discrete > networks. Examples of a discrete network might include: > > Regulatory restrictions for data transmission, > Geographic distance and diversity between networks, > Autonomous multihomed discrete networks. > > The organization must keep detailed records on how it has allocated space to > each location, including the date of each allocation. > When applying for additional internet address registrations from ARIN, the > organization must demonstrate utilization greater than 50% of both the last > block allocated and the aggregate sum of all blocks allocated from ARIN to > that organization. If an organization is unable to satisfy this 50% minimum > utilization criteria, the organization may alternatively qualify for > additional internet address registrations by having all unallocated blocks > of addresses smaller than ARIN's current minimum allocation size. > The organization may not allocate additional address space to a location > until each of that location's address blocks are 80% utilized. > The organization should notify ARIN at the time of the request their desire > to apply this policy to their account. > > > > On Wed, Mar 5, 2014 at 1:12 PM, Jeffrey Lyon <jeffrey.l...@blacklotus.net> > wrote: >> >> I am opposed to the rewording as the new discrete site is in itself >> demonstration of need. There is a technical requirement to provide at >> least a /24 of space at any discrete site. >> >> Thanks, Jeff >> >> On Wed, Mar 5, 2014 at 6:16 PM, CJ Aronson <c...@daydream.com> wrote: >> > Does anyone else have comments about this proposal? The text has been >> > changed slightly based on feedback from the PPC at NANOG. The change >> > was >> > >> > from >> > >> > Upon verification that the organization has already obtained >> > connectivity at its new discrete network site >> > >> > to >> > >> > >> > Upon verification that the organization has demonstrated need at its new >> > discrete network site >> > >> > Please send your comments on this change and on the proposal. >> > >> > Thanks! >> > -----Cathy >> > >> > >> > On Wed, Mar 5, 2014 at 2:18 AM, Andrew Dul <andrew....@quark.net> wrote: >> >> >> >> I support this new version of the policy. I believe the new text >> >> successfully deals with the issues raised and discussed at the Atlanta >> >> nanog PPC. >> >> >> >> Andrew >> >> >> >> On 3/4/2014 12:13 PM, ARIN wrote: >> >> > ## * ## >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > Recommended Draft Policy ARIN-2013-8 >> >> > Subsequent Allocations for New Multiple Discrete Networks >> >> > >> >> > Date: 4 March 2014 >> >> > >> >> > AC's assessment of conformance with the Principles of Internet Number >> >> > Resource Policy: >> >> > >> >> > "Subsequent Allocations for Additional Discrete Network Sites This >> >> > policy enables fair and impartial number resource administration by >> >> > documenting the current practice regarding allocations for additional >> >> > discrete network sites. The ARIN staff has been following a procedure >> >> > that has not been documented until now. By documenting this process >> >> > the community has clear understanding of how to get address space for >> >> > additional network sites. >> >> > >> >> > This is a technically sound proposal that has been in practice for >> >> > some time. It had just not been documented. >> >> > >> >> > This proposal has received several notes of support on the PPML and >> >> > to >> >> > date has received no negative feedback." >> >> > >> >> > Policy Statement: >> >> > >> >> > IPv4: >> >> > >> >> > Add the following statement to section 4.5.4. >> >> > >> >> > Upon verification that the organization has demonstrated need at its >> >> > new >> >> > discrete network site, the new networks shall be allocated the >> >> > minimum >> >> > allocation size under section 4.2.1.5 unless the organization can >> >> > demonstrate additional need using the immediate need criteria >> >> > (4.2.1.6). >> >> > >> >> > IPv6: >> >> > >> >> > Add an additional reference to section 6.11.5.b such that it >> >> > references both the initial allocation and subsequent allocation >> >> > sections of the IPv6 LIR policy. >> >> > >> >> > "Each network will be judged against the existing utilization >> >> > criteria >> >> > specified in 6.5.2 and 6.5.3 as if it were a separate >> >> > organization..." >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > Comments: >> >> > >> >> > a. Timetable for implementation: immediate >> >> > >> >> > b. This policy is being proposed based upon the Policy Implementation >> >> > & Experience Report from ARIN 32. >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > https://www.arin.net/participate/meetings/reports/ARIN_32/PDF/thursday/nobile-policy.pdf >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > c: Older versions of the MDN policy did contain new network criteria. >> >> > This criteria appears to have been dropped during subsequent rewrites >> >> > of the MDN policy. "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." >> >> > (https://www.arin.net/policy/archive/nrpm_20041015.pdf) >> >> > _______________________________________________ >> >> > PPML >> >> > You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to >> >> > the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML@arin.net). >> >> > Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: >> >> > http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml >> >> > Please contact i...@arin.net if you experience any issues. >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> PPML >> >> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to >> >> the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML@arin.net). >> >> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: >> >> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml >> >> Please contact i...@arin.net if you experience any issues. >> > >> > >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > PPML >> > You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to >> > the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML@arin.net). >> > Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: >> > http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml >> > Please contact i...@arin.net if you experience any issues. >> >> >> >> -- >> Jeffrey A. Lyon, CISSP-ISSMP >> Fellow, Black Lotus Communications >> mobile: (757) 304-0668 | gtalk: jeffrey.l...@gmail.com | skype: >> blacklotus.net > > -- Jeffrey A. Lyon, CISSP-ISSMP Fellow, Black Lotus Communications mobile: (757) 304-0668 | gtalk: jeffrey.l...@gmail.com | skype: blacklotus.net _______________________________________________ PPML You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML@arin.net). Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml Please contact i...@arin.net if you experience any issues.