Meeting of the ARIN Advisory Council - 18 October 2007 [Archived]

Albuquerque, New Mexico

Attendees:

• Marla Azinger (MA), Chair
• Ron da Silva, (RD), Vice Chair
• Dan Alexander (DA)
• Paul Andersen (PA)
• Cathy Aronson (CA)
• Leo Bicknell (LB)
• Bill Darte (BD)
• Alec Peterson (AP)
• Matt Pounsett (MP)
• Lea Roberts (LR)
• Alex Rubenstein (AR)
• Robert Seastrom (RS)
• Heather Schiller (HS)
• Stacy Taylor (ST)
• Suzanne Woolf (SW)

ARIN Staff:

• Einar Bohlin, Policy Analyst
• Nate Davis, COO
• Mary K Lee , Scribe
• Richard Jimmerson (RJ), CIO
• Leslie Nobile (LN), Director Registration Services
• Ray Plzak (RP), President & CEO

ARIN Board :

• Scott Bradner, Secretary
• Bill Woodcock, Trustee
• Paul Vixie, Trustee

ARIN Counsel:

• Stephen M. Ryan

1. Welcome

The Chair called the meeting to order at 5:54pm MDT. The presence of quorum was noted.

2. Agenda Bashing

The Chair called for comments. There were no comments.

3. Approval of the Minutes

ST moved:

“The ARIN Advisory Council approves the Minutes of August 30, 2007 as written.”

This was seconded by LB. The Chair called for any comments. There were no comments.
The motion carried unanimously.

ST moved:

“The ARIN Advisory Council approves the Minutes of September 20, 2007 as written.”

This was seconded by CA. The Chair called for any comments. There were no comments.

The motion carried unanimously.

4. Policy Proposal 2007-19

IANA Policy for Allocation of ASN Blocks to RIRs.

DA moved:

“The ARIN Advisory Council, based on comments from stakeholders expressed either at the ARIN XX Public Policy meeting or on the ARIN public policy mailing list, having reviewed the comments collected, noting that the Internet Resource Policy Evaluation Process has been followed, finds that there is community consensus for Policy Proposal 2007-19: IANA Policy for Allocation of ASN Blocks to RIRs and moves to it to last call.”

This was seconded by BD. The Chair called for discussion. BD stated that this was clear cut and that this proposal documents what is currently being done.

The motion carried unanimously via roll call.

5. Policy Proposal 2007-16: IPv4 Soft Landing

BD moved:

“The ARIN Advisory Council, based on comments from stakeholders expressed either at the ARIN XX Public Policy meeting or on the ARIN public policy mailing list, having reviewed the comments collected, and noting that the Internet Resource Policy Evaluation Process has been followed, finds that Policy Proposal 2007-16: IPv4 Soft Landing needs revising. The AC will work with the author.”

This was seconded by ST. The Chair called for discussion. BD stated that the author, David Conrad, will work Geoff Houston to gather more information to better revise the proposal; and he hopes to have it done by the end of the year.

The motion carried unanimously via roll call.

6. Policy Proposal 2007-18

Global Policy for the Allocation of the Remaining IPv4 Address Space.

MP moved:

“The ARIN Advisory Council, based on comments from stakeholders expressed either at the ARIN XX Public Policy meeting or on the ARIN public policy mailing list, having reviewed the comments collected, and noting that the Internet Resource Policy Evaluation Process has been followed, abandons Policy Proposal 2007-18: Global Policy for the Allocation of the Remaining IPv4 Address Space.”

This was seconded by BD. The Chair called for discussion. MP suggested that the authors of the two similar proposals work together to craft one single proposal. Every member of the AC reiterated the importance of combining the two proposals, and that the community needs to understand that this one proposal will be abandoned in proposal number and name only. The spirit of the proposal and involvement of the authors is needed.

The motion carried unanimously via roll call.

7. Policy Proposal 2007-23

End Policy for IANA IPv4 allocations to RIRs.

DA moved:

“The ARIN Advisory Council, based on comments from stakeholders expressed either at the ARIN XX Public Policy meeting or on the ARIN public policy mailing list, having reviewed the comments collected, and noting that the Internet Resource Policy Evaluation Process has been followed, finds that Policy Proposal 2007-23: End Policy for IANA IPv4 allocations to RIRs needs revising. The AC will work with the author.”

This was seconded by CA. The Chair called for discussion. MP suggested a friendly amendment to add to the motion that “The AC intends to work with authors due to the similarity of proposals”. Discussion ensued on the importance of this amendment so that the community understands that the spirit of the proposals will be kept and that involvement of all authors is desired. DA accepted the friendly amendment and this was seconded by CA. The new motion reads:

“The ARIN Advisory Council, based on comments from stakeholders expressed either at the ARIN XX Public Policy meeting or on the ARIN public policy mailing list, having reviewed the comments collected, and noting that the Internet Resource Policy Evaluation Process has been followed, finds that Policy Proposal 2007-23: End Policy for IANA IPv4 allocations to RIRs needs revising. The AC intends to work with authors due to the similarity of proposals.”

The motion carried unanimously via roll call.

8. Policy Proposal 2007-15

Authentication of Legacy Resources. The Chair stated that this proposal has been withdrawn.

9. Policy Proposal 2007-17

Legacy Outreach and Partial Reclamation.

LR moved:

“The ARIN Advisory Council, based on comments from stakeholders expressed either at the ARIN XX Public Policy meeting or on the ARIN public policy mailing list, having reviewed the comments collected, and noting that the Internet Resource Policy Evaluation Process has been followed, finds that Policy Proposal 2007-17: Legacy Outreach and Partial Reclamation needs revising. The AC will work with the author.”

This was seconded by CA. The Chair called for discussion. The straw poll was reviewed. It was the sense of the AC that clarifications still need to be made on what should be removed, and/or changed, in this proposal. The results from further clarification should be used for revision.

The motion carried unanimously via roll call.

10. Policy Proposal 2007-21

PIv6 for legacy holders with RSA and efficient use.

SW moved:

“The ARIN Advisory Council, based on comments from stakeholders expressed either at the ARIN XX Public Policy meeting or on the ARIN public policy mailing list, having reviewed the comments collected, and noting that the Internet Resource Policy Evaluation Process has been followed, finds that Policy Proposal 2007-21: PIv6 for legacy holders with RSA and efficient use needs revising. The AC will work with the author.”

This was seconded by RS. The Chair called for discussion. After discussing, the proposal was amended to state “…all direct IPv4 assignments and allocations”.

AP moved:

“The ARIN Advisory Council, based on comments from stakeholders expressed either at the ARIN XX Public Policy meeting or on the ARIN public policy mailing list, having reviewed the comments collected, noting that the Internet Resource Policy Evaluation Process has been followed, finds that there is community consensus for Policy Proposal 2007-21: PIv6 for legacy holders with RSA and efficient use, as amended, and moves to it to last call.”

This was seconded by BD. The Chair called for discussion. There was no further discussion.

The motion carried with 12 in favor, and three against (LR, ST, SW) via roll call.

11. Policy Proposal 2007-13

Removal of ISP Immediate Need from End-User. The Chair stated that this proposal had been withdrawn.

12. Policy Proposal 2007-22

Expand Timeframe of Additional Requests.

ST moved:

“The ARIN Advisory Council, based on comments from stakeholders expressed either at the ARIN XX Public Policy meeting or on the ARIN public policy mailing list, having reviewed the comments collected, noting that the Internet Resource Policy Evaluation Process has been followed, finds that there is community consensus for Policy Proposal 2007-22: Expand timeframe of Additional Requests and moves to it to last call.”

This was seconded by AR. The Chair called for discussion. The straw poll was reviewed. Discussion ensued with the AC reviewing briefly how open microphone conversations seemed to address concerns.

The motion carried with one abstention (DA) via roll call.

13. Policy Proposal 2007-14

Resource Review Process.

ST moved:

“The ARIN Advisory Council, based on comments from stakeholders expressed either at the ARIN XX Public Policy meeting or on the ARIN public policy mailing list, having reviewed the comments collected, and noting that the Internet Resource Policy Evaluation Process has been followed, finds that Policy Proposal 2007-14: Resource Review Process needs revising. The AC will work with the author.”

This was seconded by LB. The Chair called for discussion. Discussion ensued regarding the edits made on the floor during the Public Policy Meeting. ST withdrew the motion, and restated it as follows.

ST moved:

“The ARIN Advisory Council, based on comments from stakeholders expressed either at the ARIN XX Public Policy meeting or on the ARIN public policy mailing list, having reviewed the comments collected, noting that the Internet Resource Policy Evaluation Process has been followed, finds that there is community consensus for Policy Proposal 2007-14: Resource Review Process needs revising, as amended on the floor, and moves to it to last call.”

This was seconded by AR. The Chair called for any further discussion. There were no comments.

The motion failed with eight against (PA, CA, AP, MP, LR, HS, SW, MA) via roll call.

The Chair called for further discussion. It was the sense of the AC that edits made on the floor may not have been as clear to everyone as they needed to be, and that to ensure clarity it would be best to continue to work with the author on this proposal.

ST moved:

“The ARIN Advisory Council, based on comments from stakeholders expressed either at the ARIN XX Public Policy meeting or on the ARIN public policy mailing list, having reviewed the comments collected, and noting that the Internet Resource Policy Evaluation Process has been followed, finds that Policy Proposal 2007-14: Resource Review Process needs revising. The AC will work with the author.”

This was seconded by RS. The Chair called for further discussion. There were no comments.

The motion with carried with 11 in favor and four against (LB, BD, AR, RS) via roll call.

14. Policy Proposal 2007-25

IPv6 Policy Housekeeping.

LR moved:

“The ARIN Advisory Council, based on comments from stakeholders expressed either at the ARIN XX Public Policy meeting or on the ARIN public policy mailing list, having reviewed the comments collected, noting that the Internet Resource Policy Evaluation Process has been followed, finds that there is community consensus for Policy Proposal 2007-25: IPv6 Policy Housekeeping and moves to it to last call.”

This was seconded by CA. The Chair called for discussion. There were no comments.

The motion carried with one abstention (LB) via roll call.

15. Policy Proposal 2006-7

Changes to IPv6 Initial Allocation Criteria.

LR moved:

“The ARIN Advisory Council, based on comments from stakeholders expressed either at the ARIN XX Public Policy meeting or on the ARIN public policy mailing list, having reviewed the comments collected, and noting that the Internet Resource Policy Evaluation Process has been followed, abandons Policy Proposal 2006-7: Changes to IPv6 Initial Allocation Criteria.”

This was seconded by CA. The Chair called for discussion. The AC acknowledged that the community continually does not show support for this proposal, and no attempts to edit this proposal with community input were made in the last cycle.

The motion carried unanimously via roll call.

16. Policy Proposal 2007-24

IPv6 Assignment Guidelines.

ST moved:

“The ARIN Advisory Council, based on comments from stakeholders expressed either at the ARIN XX Public Policy meeting or on the ARIN public policy mailing list, having reviewed the comments collected, and noting that the Internet Resource Policy Evaluation Process has been followed, finds that Policy Proposal 2007-24: IPv6 Assignment Guidelines needs revising. The AC will work with the author.”

This was seconded by MP. The Chair called for discussion. The AC noted that a lot of input was given on the floor, and that more input can be still be received and integrated from PPML.

The motion carried with 1 abstention (LB) via roll call.

The Chair called for recess at 6:58 p.m. MDT. The Chair resumed the meeting at 7:10 p.m. MDT.

17. Any Other Business

The Chair called for any other business items.

A. Proposal Abandonment. Can the AC “kill” a proposal if the community shows no interest? Scott Bradner answered that the AC can indeed do so and, if the community disagrees, one can petition the decision per the IRPEP. MA suggested that if the AC is considering killing a proposal, the AC post to the PPML for community feedback before taking any action. HS stated that no comments posted on the PPML, does not necessarily mean that there is no interest in a policy proposal. AP stated if the AC cannot accept a proposal, then merging it with another, if applicable, could be a solution. He also stated that the AC is the ‘gatekeeper’ of the process.

B. Noise vs. Contribution on the PPML. It was suggested this topic be discussed on the AC’s mailing list. All agreed.

C. Policy Process Change. The Chair suggested the AC open a discussion on the AC’s mailing list on how they might enhance the policy process. Several ideas had been suggested, like adding an additional day for working with authors before the close of the conference, and using the polling database that the AC tested this last year. The AC will discuss ways to enhance the process on their mailing list.

C. Self-initiative Actions. It was discussed that if AC members want to help find Legacy holders, they inform the AC and Board that they are going to do so.

D. Global participation. CA suggested putting some thoughts together on how the AC can deal with globally coordinated policies. She stated she would craft an outline and send it to the AC list.

The Chair called for any further discussion.

• MA asked that the ARIN Board provide clear guidance on straw poll rules; stating that there was confusion on whom and how a request for clarification can be made via straw poll. The President stated the Board would address this matter and get back to the AC.
• CA asked that the AC be given any procedural changes that will occur in advance so that the AC is better informed. The President stated that the Board would get back to the AC with clarifications on procedural changes; and, it will do its best to inform the AC in the future before changes have been implemented.
• LB suggested that the AC have 30 to 45 minutes between the adjournment of the ARIN Public Policy Meeting, and start of the AC dinner meeting so that the proposal shepherds can speak with the proposal authors. This idea was unanimously supported. Future AC dinner meetings will start 30 minutes after the close of the daily ARIN conference meeting.
• AP acknowledged AR and RD for their service and time spent on the AC. The AC collectively thanked them and bid them farewell as of Dec 31, 2007

18. Adjournment

The Chair entertained a motion to adjourn at 7:52 p.m. MDT. ST moved to adjourn, and this was seconded by CA. The motion carried unanimously.