ARIN-prop-228 Alternative simplified criteria for justifying small IPv4 transfers [Archived]

ARIN-prop-228 Alternative simplified criteria for justifying small IPv4 transfers

Proposal Originator: Jason Schiller, Scott Leibrand

Date: 28 April 2016

Problem Statement:
ARIN transfer policy currently inherits all its demonstrated need requirements for IPv4 transfers from NRPM sections 4. Because that section was written primarily to deal with free pool allocations, it is much more complicated than is really necessary for transfers.

This proposal allows organizations using 80% of their current space to double their current holdings via 8.3 or 8.4 specified transfers, up to a certain size, such as /12 or /16. Existing section 4 need demonstration rules would continue to apply to organizations who request more than a [/12 | /16] of space.

Policy statement:
In section 8.3, replace:
The recipient must demonstrate the need for up to a 24-month supply of IP address resources under current ARIN policies and sign an RSA.

with:
The recipient must sign an RSA and either:

• Demonstrate 80% utilization of their currently allocated space to qualify to receive one or more transfers up to the total size of their current ARIN IPv4 address holdings, with a maximum size of [/12 | /16], or
• Demonstrate the need for up to a 24-month supply of IP address resources under current ARIN policies.

In section 8.4, replace:
Recipients within the ARIN region must demonstrate the need for up to a 24-month supply of IPv4 address space.

with:
Recipients within the ARIN region must either:

• Demonstrate 80% utilization of their currently allocated space to qualify to receive one or more transfers up to the total size of their current ARIN IPv4 address holdings, with a maximum size of [/12 | /16], or
• Demonstrate the need for up to a 24-month supply of IPv4 address space under current ARIN policies.

Comments:
a. Timetable for implementation: immediate
b. Anything else

The [/12 | /16] notation for the cap is intended to offer some suggestions about what the cap should be. It is our intention that this will be replaced with a single value prior to this becoming a recommended draft.

Notes on interaction with existing IPv4 assignment policy:

Organizations requiring a transfer larger than a [/12 | /16] may either:
transfer a [/12 | /16] at a time, and re-certify 80% utilization before receiving each new [/12 | /16], or
continue to qualify under NRPM 4.2 or 4.3, which allows an organization to qualify for a 24-month supply of IPv4 space via transfer. (That means, for example, that an organization that has used a /13 in less than a year would ordinarily qualify to receive a /12 via transfer.)

An organization holding a /22 and a /20 which are 80% utilized can qualify for one or more transfers over a two year period up to a /22 plus a /20 (up to 5120 IPs). After two years, or at any time that an organization wants more than the amount of transfer space approved, the organization can re-certify 80% utilization and get a new doubling window.