Meeting of the ARIN Advisory Council - 20 March 2025

Teleconference

ARIN AC Attendees:

• Kat Hunter, Chair (KH)
• Matthew Wilder, Vice Chair (MW)
• Lily Botsyoe (LB)
• Doug Camin (DC)
• Gerry George (GG)
• Elizabeth Goodson (EG)
• William Herrin (WH)
• Brian Jones (BJ)
• Kendrick Knowles (KK)
• Kaitlyn Pellak (KP)
• Gus Reese (GR)
• Leif Sawyer (LS)
• Alicia Trotman (AT)
• Chris Woodfield (CW)

Regrets:

• Alison Wood

ARIN Staff:

• Michael Abejuela, General Counsel
• John Curran, President & CEO
• Eddie Diego, Policy Analyst
• Jennifer Lee, Deputy General Counsel
• Lisa Liedel, Dir. Registration Services
• Therese Simcox, Sr. Exec. Assistant/Scribe

1. Welcome.

The Chair called the meeting to order at 4:02 p.m. ET. The presence of a quorum was noted. She acknowledged regrets from AW. The Chair noted this is the last meeting before the AC’s face-to-face in April following ARIN 55, and informed the Council that all recommended draft policies need to be reviewed before the next meeting. Proposals are not presented at ARIN 55, but they can be mentioned.

2. Agenda Review.

The Chair reviewed the agenda with the Council and called for any comments. She noted that 2024-7 will not be moved forward, as a staff and legal review needs to be conducted.

3. Approval of the Minutes.

(Exhibit A)

It was moved by CW, and seconded by LB, that:

“The ARIN Advisory Council approves the 20 February 2025 Minutes, as written.”

The Chair called for comments. There were no comments.

The motion carried with no objections.

4. Draft Policy ARIN-2023-8: Reduce 4.1.8 Maximum Allocation.

GG stated that he met with the NRPM WG, and they had a productive discussion. They leaned toward the notion that the identified problem in the problem statement may not still exist. He pointed out that the AC cannot change the problem statement, therefore he is considering whether the policy needs to move forward. He will pose the following to the Public Policy Mailing List (PPML): the problem statement may not match the current situation; policy background; point out the stats of the waitlist from submission to present — noting it is shorter than it was; feedback is being sought; and, going into ARIN 55 we are looking at potential abandonment as the problem statement cannot be changed (barring any supportive feedback).

MW stated that he agreed and although abandonment may be in the forecast, it does not mean that the matter would not be considered in the future.

CW stated that it makes sense that at the present time the statement may not be valid, but it may not continue to be true at some point in the future. His concern was that if the existing waitlist entries were affected due to the time frame and entries expanding to where they were before, would it be too late to introduce this policy?

GG stated CW had a valid point and he said this was discussed with the WG. It will be pointed out at ARIN 55 that since the problem statement cannot be modified, it is open for someone to resubmit a proposal more targeted toward the problem. As it is currently written, it is skewed in a way that makes it difficult to get acceptance. There is no clear sense of a path forward.

DC pointed out the similarity to another policy a few months ago that resulted in new policy 2025-1. He suggested that an AC member can submit some language to fit the problem.

The Chair noted that the original author is no longer in support of the policy. She appreciated the AC’s sensitivities to obtaining the community’s input and not abandoning the policy too soon. She advised GG that as he presents the policy, ensure that it is clear to the community that this is the final look at the text and there are no more options. The community is no longer in support on the PPML, but we want to hear from the community in person. GG acknowledged. The Chair also added to state on the feedback page that you want positive or negative feedback since the last edits were made. The Chair stated that she believed the AC made every effort they could on this policy.

5. Draft Policy ARIN-2024-5: Rewrite of NRPM Section 4.4 Micro-Allocation.

CW stated that a staff and legal review has been conducted with only minor modifications. However, since updating the text, a handful of comments have occurred since then that will generate additional questions from staff and may require rewrites that are beyond prudent for this policy to become a recommended draft. Therefore, he will not make a motion to move it forward at this time. CW stated he will present it as-is at ARIN 55. He further noted for the record that the questions received are not questioning the policy moving forward to recommended draft status, but rather whether the language captures all the use cases that we want without including those that we do not want or excluding ones that we do. The validity of the policy is not in question, rather, is the current language sufficient. The Chair stated the approach CW is taking is the right path.

6. Draft Policy ARIN-2024-7: Addition of Definitions for General and Special Purpose IP Addresses.

KP stated that she received some feedback from the PPML after asking if the work on the policy should continue. Consensus is at a minimum, indicating work should not continue in the text’s current state. She explained that comments indicated that if a policy is just adding a definition, then it is not a good policy. To be policy, substantial changes to the text would be warranted. KP intends to present the draft policy at ARIN 55. She will ask the community if work should continue it in its current state, or if it should be abandoned and resubmitted with actual changes to the NRPM.

The Chair noticed that over the course of the discussions on this policy, updating it may cause more issues than what is being corrected. In her opinion it could be up for abandonment, as she did not see many supporting it.

7. Draft Policy ARIN-2024-10: Registration Requirements and Timing of Requirements with Retirement of Section 4.2.3.7.2.

AT stated that since the AC’s last meeting they have posted to the PPML twice for feedback, and the staff created a group mailing list for past ARIN Fellows to give them an avenue to voice their opinions. She stated the policy shepherds have not received any comments from either group. AT will be presenting the policy at ARIN 55 and hoped to receive comments at that time.

8. Draft Policy ARIN-2024-11: IPv4 Transition Efficiency Reallocation Policy (ITERP).

BJ stated that he posted to the PPML again to garner feedback and refocus discussion from the size of blocks to the changes to Section 4 to reallocate resources. There have not been many comments. He will present the policy at ARIN 55.

9. Draft Policy ARIN-2025-1: Clarify ISP and LIR Definitions and References to Address Ambiguity in NRPM Text.

LS stated that he has received limited feedback from the PPML, and he applied edits to the text. He posted it to the PPML earlier this week and received a request for redlines. He hopes that folks review the text and respond. He will present the policy at ARIN 55.

MW stated this is a good example of a policy that should be presented as a blanket summary rather than presenting the large number of edits made to the text. The Chair stated that she believed all changes need to be presented.

The President stated that if the policy is supported, the community needs to be clear on what they are adopting. Explanation of edits needs to be clear and unambiguous. The Chair stated that she will work with staff. The President further noted that there were policies in the past that had changes described and not detailed. If we do that, then it needs to be very clear. MW thanked him for the guidance. MW asked LS to discuss it with him. DS stated there are two versions and one is redlined and highlighted. He suggested to show the changes made to be highlighted in red which would indicate what is to be added to the NRPM.

10. Draft Policy ARIN-2025-2: Clarify 8.5.1 Registration Services Agreement.

GR stated that this text was moved to draft policy status last month and he posted it to the PPML. He received positive feedback and is monitoring the list for any further comments. He will present the policy at ARIN 55.

11. ARIN-prop-341: NRPM Section 9, Out of Region Use.

DC stated that the original submission was thorough, but clarifying changes were discussed with the author. The text has been updated, and the title has been changed to ‘Section 9 Out of Region Use Minimum Criteria.’ DC noted that the proposal meets the criteria to move it forward to draft policy status.

It was moved by DC, and seconded by BJ, that:

“The ARIN Advisory Council accepts ‘ARIN-prop-341: Section 9 Out of Region Use Minimum Criteria’ as a Draft Policy.”

The Chair called for discussion. There were no comments.

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

12. ARIN AC Working Groups.

• Policy Experience Report Working Group (PER WG) Update. CW stated that there was a question whether to tackle any policy regarding leasing. It was determined it was not in the PER WG Charter and was a larger question than the group can handle. He noted there would be a leasing table topic at ARIN 55. He stated the WG is awaiting the next PER, and they will address it when it is received.

  The Policy Analyst clarified CW’s statement on the leasing table topic stating that AW had cancelled the table topic after the WG decided not to continue with it.

  KP suggested that if the matter comes back around, consider a table topic on offering IP addresses as collateral for loans, which she stated one broker is currently doing.

• Number Resource Policy Manual Working Group (NRPM WG) Update. BJ stated that the WG met this month with GG and assisted him with his work on his assigned policy. KP and LB volunteered to look at Section 6 and are looking for clarification where needed. They also met on Section 6 noting it is a full section with many instances of ‘allocation’ versus ‘assignment’. KP asked if it should be broken up or edited in one policy, noting there may be too many redlines for one policy.

  MW suggested folding it into 2025-1, or to wait until 2025-1 runs its course and then look at Section 6 and have a plan on what changes would be suitable for the community. He stated it would be best to avoid two competing sets of policy that touch on the same section.

  The Chair stated this is a good table topic for ARIN 55 to garner feedback, and asked KP to email her a request for the table topic. KP agreed.

13. Any Other Business.

• Changes in Employment and Affiliation. CW stated he is now in the consulting business and self-employed. He did not expect any conflicts at this time. If that changes, he may need to recuse himself from voting.
• Expense Reports. The Chair reminded the Council to please submit expenses for any RIR or NANOG meetings they have attended.
• Important Due Dates for ARIN 55. The Policy Analyst reminded the Council of upcoming due dates in preparation for ARIN 55. He noted that he will post them in the Zoom chat, and he will email the AC as well.
• Presentation Slides. The Chair stated that primary policy shepherds with new Council members as secondary shepherds need to work together to see how slides are created. She stated that if a primary shepherd cannot attend the ARIN meeting, secondary shepherds need to present the policy. Impact slides are expected in each presentation. She noted questions to the community during the presentations can be made. She also noted that redlines will be displayed in the future and staff is working on it for the fall ARIN meeting. The Chair stated to please submit slides to her and the Vice Chair as soon as possible. If any primary shepherds cannot present, please let the Policy Analyst know when the slides are submitted.

14. Adjournment.

The Chair entertained a motion to adjourn at 4:56 p.m. ET. BJ moved to adjourn, seconded by LS. The meeting adjourned with no objections.