Meeting of the ARIN Advisory Council - 21 November 2013 [Archived]

Teleconference

Advisory Council Attendees:

• John Sweeting, Chair (JSw)
• Dan Alexander, Vice Chair (DA)
• Cathy Aronson (CA)
• Kevin Blumberg (KB)
• Bill Darte (BD)
• Owen DeLong (OD)
• David Farmer (DF)
• Chris Grundemann (CG)
• Stacy Hughes (SH)
• Scott Leibrand (SL)
• Bill Sandiford (BS)
• Heather Schiller (HS)
• John Springer (JSp)

Minute Taker:

• Thérèse Colosi

ARIN Staff:

• Michael Abejuela (MA), Assoc. General Counsel

• Einar Bohlin, Senior Policy Analyst

• John Curran, President & CEO

• Nate Davis, COO

• Leslie Nobile, (LN) Dir., Registration Services

ARIN General Counsel:

• Steve Ryan, Esq.

Observer:

• Tina Morris (2014 AC Member-elect)

Regrets:

• Milton Mueller

1. Welcome

The Chair called the meeting to order at 4:05 p.m. EST. The presence of quorum was noted. The Chair welcomed Tina Morris to the teleconference.

2. Agenda Review

The Chair called for any comments. The Chair added the Advisory Council Vacancy item to Item 8. ‘Any Other Business’.

3. Approval of the Minutes

It was moved by SL, and seconded by BD, that:

“The ARIN Advisory Council approves the Minutes of 11 October 2013, as written.”

The Chair called for any objections. There were no objections

The motion carried with no objections.

4. Recommended Draft Policy ARIN-2013-4: RIR Principles

It was moved by CB, and seconded by OD, that:

“The Advisory Council recommends ‘ARIN-2013-4: RIR Principles’ for adoption and sends it to the Board of Trustees.”

The Chair called for discussion. There was no discussion.

BS and Counsel joined at this time (4:09 p.m. EST.)

The motion carried 13 in favor, and one abstention (BS) via roll call vote. BS stated that he had abstained because his call had dropped, and when he called back into the meeting he was not sure if he had missed some of the discussion.

5. Draft Policy ARIN-2013-7: Merge IPv4 ISP and End-User Requirements

SL stated that this DP (draft policy) did not gain much community support, with the suggestion that it be split into two different proposals. SL suggested one proposal regarding changes to requirements for new entrants, and one proposal for cleaning up the non-controversial items. He noted that he had sent a power point slide deck to the AC for review outlining these two suggested proposals. He noted that CA and BD had provided comments; and, he queried the rest of the AC for feedback.

SH thanked him for the power point deck. She believed it was suitable for presentation at next ARIN meeting or on the Public Policy Mailing List (PPML), if appropriate. She supported having it split into two proposals.

SL stated the author was on the AC, and was amenable to this idea. He suggested splitting the existing proposal into two new proposals, both with new proposal numbers and names. The President stated that he agreed with SL with splitting as a way to move forward.

DF asked if this needed to be voted upon to adopt the two new proposals onto the AC docket? The Chair responded that it was not necessary because they would be 2 new draft policies. DF stated he was under the understanding that this would be a policy action, and according to the Policy Development Process (PDP), all policy actions needed to be voted upon. The President stated he would investigate this matter during this teleconference.

KB stated that he was in support of the idea, but that he was not in support of splitting it today. He suggested taking it to the community for input on the idea of splitting the proposal. It was a highly discussed DP, and he believed the community should weigh-in, as splitting a proposal was not a common occurrence.

The President came back with the result of researching the PDP, and stated that he was definitely incorrect on splitting as a way to move forward. There were some potential issues that arose from splitting, depending on the draft policy status; therefore, in the revised PDP, there was intentionally no option for splitting a proposal. The AC had the option to abandon, revise or merge draft policies. He recommended that the AC decide what text would be removed, then revise the remaining text, and submit a separate policy proposal on the text that was removed. He stated that this new policy proposal could easily become a DP if the AC chose to do so.

SL stated he would choose the item regarding cleaning up non-controversial text as the proposal text to be revised. It would be a different DP when completed. The items regarding requirements for new entrants could potentially become more than one proposal and would be the new policy proposal resulting from the split. DA stated he agreed completely.

SL stated he would continue to work on this option if all agreed. There were no objections.

6. ARIN-prop-191 Subsequent Allocations for New Multiple Discrete Networks

It was moved by CA, and seconded by BD, that:

“The Advisory Council accepts ARIN-prop-191 as a Draft Policy.”

The Chair called for discussion. CA stated that she had updated the title - a great suggestion by OD. She also noted that the text was updated based on the staff clarity and understanding report; and, the revised text was sent to the AC for review. She believed it was ready to move forward. SL stated that he agreed, and gave CA kudos for her efforts.

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

7. Improve Communications Group (IC) Report

The group stated that there was no update at this time.

8. Any Other Business

The Chair called for any other business.

Upcoming Advisory Council Vacancy

On November 17, 2013, the Chair stated that he had received AC member Bill Sandiford’s letter of resignation (effective December 31, 2013), in accordance with Mr. Sandiford’s election to the ARIN Board of Trustees, commencing on January 1, 2014.

In accordance with the AC’s “Procedure for the Appointment of an Interim Member to the ARIN Advisory Council” (which appoints the runner-up with the highest number of votes, who received at least 5% of the votes cast), the Chair announced that Andrew Dul had been chosen to fill the vacancy (upon Mr. Dul’s acceptance) for a period of one year, commencing on January 1, 2014.

It was moved by RS, and seconded by CA, that:

“The ARIN Advisory Council appoints Mr. Andrew Dul, contingent upon his acceptance, to fill the vacancy created by the departure of Bill Sandiford from the Advisory Council effective January 01, 2014.”

The Chair called for discussion. The President stated that this seat would be up for election at the next ARIN general election.

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

The President stated he would contact Andrew.

9. Adjournment

The Chair entertained a motion to adjourn at 4:33 p.m. EST. RS moved to adjourn, seconded by SH. The meeting adjourned with no objections.