Doug, Great explanation of the possibility of unintended consequences which such a "correction" would lead to. As reasonable as the suggestion seemed, the effects would definitely resonate beyond just this draft policy.
It highlights how rules and conditions of one policy can have impacts on other policies, and why they can't simply be considered in isolation of each other. Gerry E. George ICT Consultant and Business Solutions Architect; Digi Solv , Inc. [P.O. Box 1677, Castries, Saint Lucia] Mobile : (758) 728-4858 / Int'l Office : (347) 450-3444 / Skype: DigiSolv Email : [email protected] / LinkedIn : https://www.linkedin.com/in/gerrygeorge/ Please consider the environment before printing this email. Thank you. From: "Douglas Camin" <[email protected]> To: "Fernando Frediani" <[email protected]>, [email protected] Sent: Thursday, April 16, 2026 10:24:26 PM Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Seeking Comments - Draft Policy ARIN-2025-3: Change Section 9 Out-of-Region Use Minimum Criteria Fernando - Appreciate your comment - I wanted to share some background on the 50% usage suggestion as it was considered when I was still the shepherd of this policy. Ultimately, we determined that there were too many side effects from making that change. The two primary examples: 1. Small company has subsidiaries or offices in foreign countries but is based in the US. 4 offices (US, LA, EU, ME) and wants a /24 for each. Numerically they have more foreign offices than domestic. A 50% threshold would force them to purchase or own more space than they need. (Note this was also a primary rationale from the policy author for lowering the threshold to /22, as this scenario has happened in the real world.) 2. Large company operating in many RIR regions and has a reasonably large amount of space. However, under this policy if they wanted to add space (even by purchasing on the open market), if 50% of their space was in use outside of the ARIN region, they would be unable to add any space under any circumstances with ARIN. In particular, example 2 is a significant change in policy application that would likely unintentionally impact existing mid-to-large customers, depending on the configuration of their operations. Welcome your advocacy for that if you still feel it is warranted but thought it important to share the background that it was heard as a suggested change and was given due consideration. Hope that helps - Doug -- Douglas J. Camin Vice Chair, Advisory Council [email protected] From: ARIN-PPML <[email protected]> on behalf of Fernando Frediani <[email protected]> Date: Thursday, April 16, 2026 at 8:51 PM To: [email protected] <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Seeking Comments - Draft Policy ARIN-2025-3: Change Section 9 Out-of-Region Use Minimum Criteria The in-region usage should not be neither /22 or /24 but +50% of ARIN resources assigned to the organization, in line with other RIRs. It does not make sense to get resources from ARIN and use most of it in other regions. If you have a bigger need in other region ask (or transfer) IPs in the region within the respective RIR. IP space is organized in Regional Internet Registers for a reason, to be used for the reality of that region, to develop the internet in the region. It doesn't make sense to take resources from one region and use completely in the other. Otherwise it is too easy and flexible to choose the more flexible and cheap RIR but use resources in a different region. Policies that are developed and apply to those IP space are developed taking into consideration the reality of that region internet ecosystem. Using a smaller amount of that IP space for auxiliary proposes is accepts (an international link, a ARIN customer that also needs connectivity somewhere else in another region, etc). But not majority of it. I think people need to learn how to live with fewer IP addresses and make the best usage of it. If majority of that assigned IP space is required in another region, then just transfer it. Fernando Frediani On 4/16/2026 4:45 PM, Mohibul Mahmud wrote: Hello Gerry, Thank you for starting this discussion. I generally support the proposed change from a /22 to a /24 for the in-region usage requirement. The current threshold seems too high for smaller organizations that may have legitimate operational needs extending outside the ARIN region, but do not have enough in-region utilization to meet a /22. Lowering the requirement to a /24 appears to better reflect the reality that smaller operators can still have a real and valid connection to the ARIN region. At the same time, I think the community should carefully consider safeguards against abuse. In particular, it would be helpful to clarify whether the existing “real and substantial connection” standard is enough on its own, or whether additional guidance is needed for cases where out-of-region use significantly exceeds in-region use. Overall, I think this proposal is addressing a real scale problem for smaller organizations, and I support moving the discussion forward. Best regards, Mohibul Mahmud On Thu, Apr 16, 2026 at 1:26 PM Gerry E.. George < [email protected] > wrote: BQ_BEGIN Hello PPML members, As we head to the ARIN 57 Public Policy and Members Meetings, I am seeking to initiate and encourage some discussion on the Draft Policy ARIN-2025-3: Change Section 9 Out-of-Region Use Minimum Criteria. This is in anticipation of getting some robust discussion on PPML and also for engagement at the mic along during the meeting. ARIN-2025-3: Change Section 9 Out Of Region Use Minimum Criteria The Problem: Current ARIN policy allows IPv4 addresses to be used outside the ARIN service region if the organization is using an IPv4 /22 (or equivalent aggregate) within the ARIN service region. This draft policy suggests the /22 requirement harms smaller organizations that have less than a /22 in region but do require some out of region use. What It Does: This draft policy reduces the in-region usage requirement from /22 to a /24. The Impact: This draft policy would allow usage of ARIN issued space outside of the ARIN region as long as the organization is using at least a /24 within the ARIN region. In Summary: Updates Section 9 rules on using ARIN resources outside region. Considerations : - How much of an issue could this be? Does it matter to the community? - Should there be a requirement for the OOR use be not more/greater than the in-ARIN region use? - Can this unfavorably impact companies having more growth OOR, and drive them to other RIRs and away from ARIN in such instances? - Is there a probability for potential abuse via the Waitlist, and if so, should there be consideration for limitations to the designated region use for 4.1.8. requests? - Is the "real and substantial connection" requirement in Section 9 be sufficient to prohibit or reduce the potential for abuse? Here are some potential discussion questions: * What problem is this solving—abuse, ambiguity, or scale? * Does tightening rules harm global operators? * How should ARIN balance regional stewardship vs. global Internet reality? * Are there measurable enforcement mechanisms? Looking forward to some robust discourse and to the presentation and engagement next week at ARIN-57. Gerry E. George ICT Consultant and Business Solutions Architect; Digi Solv , Inc. [P.O. Box 1677, Castries, Saint Lucia] Mobile : (758) 728-4858 / Int'l Office : (347) 450-3444 / Skype: DigiSolv Email : [email protected] / LinkedIn : https://www.linkedin.com/in/gerrygeorge/ Please consider the environment before printing this email. Thank you. _______________________________________________ ARIN-PPML You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List ( [email protected] ). Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml Please contact [email protected] if you experience any issues. _______________________________________________ ARIN-PPML You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List ( [email protected] ). Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml Please contact [email protected] if you experience any issues. BQ_END _______________________________________________ ARIN-PPML You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List ([email protected]). Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml Please contact [email protected] if you experience any issues.
_______________________________________________ ARIN-PPML You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List ([email protected]). Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml Please contact [email protected] if you experience any issues.
