Meeting of the ARIN Advisory Council - 14 January 1999 [Archived]

Chantilly, Virginia

Attendees:

• Steve Corbato
• Bill Darte
• Avi Freedman
• Hank Kilmer
• Tony Li
• Bill Manning
• Guy Middleton
• Justin Newton
• Hilarie Orman
• Alec Peterson
• David Whipple
• Cathy Wittbrodt

Guests

• Kim Hubbard, President of ARIN
• John Curran, Chairman of the Board of Trustees (BoT)
• Dennis Molloy, ARIN counsel
• Mary K. Lee, notetaker

Ed Kern, AC member arrived at 10:15.

The meeting was called to order at 9:20 by Hilarie Orman, Chairman.

A special welcome was extended to the two re-elected members of the AC, Guy Middleton and Cathy Wittbrodt and to the new members of the AC, Steve Corbato, Tony Li, Bill Manning and Justin Newton.

Review Agenda

The agenda was reviewed by the participants. Avi Freedman suggested adding SWIP processing to the agenda. Two other items were suggested, SWIP appeals and the draft guidelines for the AC authored by John Curran. The agenda was accepted as amended.

Review Minutes of Last Meeting

Hilarie Orman inquired about email voting. Email voting must include all members and the vote must be unanimous. This is required for the Board of Trustees, but not for the Advisory Council. It was noted that the AC is large and the process would be slow and cumbersome. Justin Newton stated that some organizations do indeed use email voting. The minutes were accepted and will be posted to the ARIN member website.

AC Chairperson Nomination/Selection

Cathy Wittbrodt nominated Alec Peterson for Chairperson and Hank Kilmer seconded this nomination. Alec Peterson nominated Cathy Wittbrodt for Chairperson and Steve Corbato seconded that nomination. A vote was taken and the results were as follows: Steve Corbato, Bill Darte, Avi Freedman, Hank Kilmer,Guy Middleton, Justin Newton, Hilarie Orman, David Whipple and Cathy Wittbrodt voted for Alec Peterson. Tony Li and Alec Peterson voted for Cathy Wittbrodt and Bill Manning abstained. Alec Peterson was elected Chairman of the Advisory Council and the appointment to office took immediately.

Statistical Reporting

Kim Hubbard announced that the statistics information being provided for today s meeting included the statistics requested by the AC at the last meeting. It was noted that many SWIPs are not automated. Hilarie Orman inquired about the number of telephone calls per day. Kim Hubbard replied that there are roughly 50 calls per day being handled by 4-5 IP Analysts. ISP first time requests are just requests and as many as 60% do not qualify. Alec Peterson asked what are the reasons for such a high rejection percentage. The main answer is that most of them just need to go to their upstream provided. They come to ARIN because they desire portable address space. Dave Whipple asked how many applied as multi-homed and how many of the ISPs rejected are multi-homed. In December, 127 blocks were issued under the multi-homed policy. Hilarie Orman asked how many people apply multiple times before they are accepted. This is not currently being tracked. It was noted that if you apply and have been approved, you get a maintainer ID, but this is only for ISPs. Everyone who comes into the system gets a ticket number.

Some of the reasons for rejections are policy and application problems. Some of the applicants don’t understand the policies and sometimes applicants submit again as they get bigger. All rejections are recorded as a written response. John Curran asked what are the five most common reasons for rejection. Kim Hubbard replied that applicants are close to meeting the requirements and try to “squeeze in”, haven’t clearly read the instructions or think that it doesn’t hurt to try. Kim also noted that our technical writer is reviewing all of our documents for clarity. John Curran suggested having a list for codes for rejection. This would facilitate tracking of rejections. Kim Hubbard stated that there was a need for an “other” category. Alec Peterson commented that there are two perspectives, that of ARIN and the applicants.

Hilarie Orman moved that the AC request a list of reasonable rejection codes, five or so, including an “other” category, to be submitted to the AC for review. Dave Whipple seconded this recommendation. Alec Peterson called for a vote and it was unanimous. It was requested that the list of codes be sent to the mailing list.

Kim Hubbard ubbaasked the AC if they needed all of the statistics that had been presented to them today. The general consensus was that the statistics currently being provided would be sufficient and that they looked great.

ICANN/ASO

The three regional registries, ARIN, RIPE and APNIC have worked together on the draft document presented today Proposal and Application for Recognition as the Address Supporting Organization for the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN). Kim started off the discussion by mentioning that one of ARIN s main objectives is to prevent ARIN member roles from being diminished. Bill Darte suggested that one possible approach for membership would be to just include two classes one for the registries and a second category for everyone else. The ASO proposal includes three classes of membership one for Charter Members (Registries), one for Corporate Members and the third category would be for Associate Members. Certainly money will be a factor for membership - the fees have not yet been determined. Would people want to join ARIN (or the other registries) or join the ASO as an independent member? As of now, this is difficult to determine.

The discussion continued about the ASO and what type of organization it would be, how it would be funded and how large it would be. John Curran mentioned that there could be very little work or a large number of proposals could be presented.

Hilarie Orman said that the size and needs of the ASO should be restricted. Bill Manning wanted to know if ARIN and the other registries could tell ICANN how the ASO should function and what its size should be. Bill Darte said that if the structure of the ASO included the three registries as one category and the second category was other members it would not dilute the influence of the registries and would still give ample representation to the public. Each entity would have three members each for a total of twelve. Three people from the ASO will be part of the ICANN board. There is an ICANN meeting along with the APRICOT meeting scheduled for March 1-5, but the ICANN would like the proposal by the end of January.

Bill Manning noted that the Africans have formed AFRINIC and intend to be operating by the end of March. Kim responded to this announcement by stating that they need to show to ICANN and the other registries that they have ISP consensus, a business plan and other necessary strategies for implementation. John Curran noted that any contracts with ICANN will be public. This discussion will be continued on the list.

Lowering minimum allocation from /19 to /20

The Board of Trustees has returned this recommendation to the Advisory Council. At the Member’s Meeting of October 16, the members were in favor of lowering the minimum allocation from a /19 to a /20, but they were not in favor of lowering the multi-homed threshold. Tony Li stated that he was against lowering the minimum allocation because of the implosion on the routing tables. Steve Corbato wanted to know what kind of implosions were being seen. Tony stated that the system is showing stress fractures. Some more general discussion ensued.

Hilarie Orman moved that the AC reaffirm their original recommendation. This recommendation states that the AC recommend to the BoT that the bit boundary on all existing non-multi-homed-specific allocation policies be lowered by one bit, i.e., the minimum allocations would move from a /19 to a /20 for those who qualify, and for those who qualify for addresses under the current multi-homing policy (for which the current policy states organizations that have previously used a /21 would receive a /20 from a reserved /19) would now be changed to “organizations that have used a /22 and agreed to renumber would now receive a /21 from a reserved /20”. Steve Corbato seconded this motion. Alec Peterson called for a vote. Steve Corbato, Avi Freedman, Bill Manning, Justin Newton and Hilarie Orman were in favor of the original recommendation. Ed Kern, Hank Kilmer, Tony Li, Guy Middleton, Alec Peterson, Dave Whipple and Cathy Wittbrodt were opposed. Bill Darte abstained. The motion failed to carry.

Dave Whipple made a motion to lower the minimum allocation from a /19 to a /20 for non-multi-homed entities. Alec Peterson seconded this motion. In the vote that followed, Steve Corbato, Bill Darte, Avi Freedman, Bill Manning, Guy Middleton, Hilarie Orman, Alec Peterson and Dave Whipple were in favor. Ed Kern, Hank Kilmer, Tony Li, Justin Newton and Cathy Wittbrodt were opposed. There were no abstentions. The motion carried.

Steve Corbato recommended that the minimum allocation for multi-homed entities be lowered from a /21 to a /22. Hilarie Orman seconded this recommendation. Dave Whipple reminded everyone that the members who were present at the meeting in October 1998 were not in favor of this lowering of minimum allocations for multi-homed entities. Steve Corbato, Avi Freedman, Justin Newton and Hilarie Orman were in favor. Bill Manning abstained and the rest of the AC was opposed to this recommendation. The recommendation failed to carry.

Kim Hubbard will take the first recommendation to the Board of Trustees at the scheduled meeting tomorrow.

Everyone agreed to a working lunch and the meeting continued.

Task Identification/Assignment for 1^st quarter of AC Year (Bill Darte)

Hank Kilmer and Cathy Wittbrodt will meet in February regarding statistics. Bill Darte will draft a paper on ISP information. Steve Corbato, Avi Freedman, Hank Kilmer, Bill Manning, Dave Whipple and Cathy Wittbrodt will meet to put together a list of data that the AC would like to see at each AC meeting. Bill Darte departed at 12:30p.

Action item from last meeting (John Curran)

John Curran presented a draft document to the AC detailing a “Recommendation Formation Process for the AC”. A lively discussion followed and many AC members wanted to know if ARIN members or AC members should take the lead for Working Groups. Hilarie Orman stated that she is concerned that John Curran s proposal is overly bureaucratic. Kim Hubbard would like to start some Working Groups on the member mailing list. The topics she would like to see discussed are the Routing Registry, IPv6, and the database. This would be a good way to get the members involved and utilize their knowledge and expertise.

Dave Whipple motioned that John Curran take the document, get input from the other Trustees on the Board, revise the document and resubmit it to the AC. Bill Manning seconded the motion. Hilarie Orman commented that the document could impose functioning problems on the AC and that it contains too much structure. Alec Peterson called for a vote. Hilarie Orman was opposed to this motion and Tony Li and Guy Middleton abstained. The rest of AC was in favor and the motion carried.

New Business. IPv6 Policy

Kim Hubbard presented a “Summary of IPv6 Assignment and Allocation Policy Document” to the AC. The Regional Registries will obtain subTLAs from ICANN. The routine for IPv6 space will be the same as that for IPv4, but will involve a lot more address space. Kim will send the document out to the members in about a week. Bill Manning will spend some time reading the document and recommending changes for it. It was noted that all three of the Registries will have the same policy. Justin Newton asked what s the customer site. Kim responded that it will be clarified in the final document. Dave Whipple asked how ARIN verified current utilization and Kim said via SWIP. Bill Manning asked about reclamation of address space. There are some definition problems including the difference between utilization and allocation. Kim Hubbard will send the full policy document to the AC first and then to the members list.

Maintenance Fee for Grandfathered Records

Kim Hubbard will be making a formal presentation to the Board tomorrow detailing a procedure for charging maintenance fees for grandfathered records. There will be two phases proposed, the first will be for In-addrs and the second phase will be determined in the future. The maintenance fee will be charged to all customers who do not pay an annual registration fee. This will include customers who have pre-ARIN allocations. The billing will be done by e-commerce. ARIN s legal counsel has been consulted and agrees that ARIN has the legal right to charge maintenance fees for grandfathered records.

Organizing Measurement Efforts (Corbato)

This item was covered earlier in the day. Cathy Wittbrodt has setup a committee to select facts and data that will be presented at each AC meeting.

ARIN Role in Latin America (Corbato)

Steve Corbato stated that South America is not aware of who ARIN is and that ARIN may need to extend an outreach program.

At one point, the Mexican NIC had offered to translate our documentation into Spanish, but at this time, no work has been done. However, if the LATINIC is currently forming this effort may not be needed. Steve Corbato asked what is the expected time frame for separation. Hilarie Orman asked what is the process for forming a NIC (Regional Registry). A group must be formed, then the group needs to approach all of the ISPs for support and buy-in. The next step would be to approach ICANN, who in turn will consult with the other Regional Registries.

Action item for Kim Hubbard: keep AC advised of LATINIC development.

Lifetime of IPv4 Addresses (Li)

When will IPv4 space run out? Bill Manning stated that KC has been doing work on address consumption. Guy Middleton wanted to know if RIPE and APNIC are working on this, also. Bill Manning has been using his tools to do reports on address consumption. Avi Freedman and Alec Peterson will take a look at the input from Tony Li and Bill Manning.

SWIP Automation

SWIPs can be done automatically if they are correct and don t have to be deleted. Many are done manually because of errors.

Rwhois is available for use. Most end-users don t know about SWIP. Kim Hubbard is concerned about SWIP security. ARIN may add a host count to the SWIP template.

Appeals

Historically, appeals went from ARIN to the IANA, noted John Curran. With Jon Postel s death, we no longer have his leadership at IANA and ICANN is not yet a formalized organization. Currently, there is no working appeals process. Hilarie Orman said that the way exceptions are handled are part of the open transparency asked for by the community at-large. Guy Middleton stated that Jon Postel had the advantage of being impartial and fair. Tony Li noted that Kim Hubbard already has the power to make exceptions but occasionally needs to have access to a “higher power”. Some of the requests for exception to ARIN policies involve the Internet Infrastructure.

Avi Freedman motioned that, until formal definition of how internet infrastructure and allocation policies are defined, the AC recommend to the BoT that at the /24 and /23 level, ARIN executive staff can have the discretion to make exception to policy for critical internet infrastructure. Tony Li seconded this motion. A vote was called for and the results were as follows Justin Newton was opposed, Alec Peterson abstained and all else were in favor. The motion carried. Justin Newton stated for the record that his opposition was not based on a lack of confidence in the ability of ARIN staff but rather that he thinks that the registries should not make exceptions. The reclaiming of address space from allocations to critical internet infrastructures will be discussed on the mailing list.

Schedule next meeting

The next Member meeting and AC meeting will take place in mid-April.

The ARIN staff was introduced to the Advisory Council.

The meeting adjourned at 3:15