1 / 8

Draft Policy 2012-5 Removal of Renumbering Requirement for Small Multihomers

Draft Policy 2012-5 Removal of Renumbering Requirement for Small Multihomers. 2012-5 - History. Origin: ARIN-prop-167 (Apr 2012) AC Shepherds: Cathy Aronson, Bill Darte Current version: 25 July 2012 Text and assessment online & in Discussion Guide

tobias
Download Presentation

Draft Policy 2012-5 Removal of Renumbering Requirement for Small Multihomers

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Draft Policy 2012-5Removal of RenumberingRequirement for Small Multihomers

  2. 2012-5 - History Origin: ARIN-prop-167 (Apr 2012) AC Shepherds: Cathy Aronson, Bill Darte Current version: 25 July 2012 Text and assessment online & in Discussion Guide https://www.arin.net/policy/proposals/2012_5.html

  3. 2012-5 – Summary This proposal removes existing NRPM policy 4.3.6.3 "Additional Assignments for Small Multihomers". Eliminating this section removes the requirement for small multi-homers to renumber when they come back to ARIN for additional IPv4 address space.

  4. 2012-5 – Status at other RIRs No similar proposals/discussions.

  5. 2012-5 – Staff Assessment Staff Comments: Issues/Concerns? The original intent of NRPM 4.3.6.3 was to conserve routing table slots. However, statistics have shown that NRPM 4.3.6.3 has rarely been used and that most small multi-homers have not come back to ARIN for additional space. Implementation: Resource Impact? – Minimal (3 mos.) Updated guidelines and staff training

  6. 2012-5 – Legal Assessment No significant legal issue is posed by this proposal.

  7. 2012-5 – PPML Discussion 26 posts by 12 people (5 in favor and 2 against) “I would argue that since the policy as-is is not providing any benefit and changing the policy would do no harm and provide benefit, changing policy makes sense.” “I would argue there's no reason to change policy for a few orgs when the majority aren't affected by current policy in a negative way. There will always be at least one.” “I support this proposal, because the existing requirement treads dangerously close to the dubious grounds of ARIN taking a position on the 'routing utility' of the assignment at hand.”

  8. Draft Policy 2012-5Removal of RenumberingRequirement for Small Multihomers

More Related