Your IP address could not be determined at this time.

Meeting of the ARIN Board of Trustees

Friday, 16 December 2011
Teleconference

Minutes

Attendees:

  • Timothy Denton, Chair
  • Paul Andersen, Treasurer
  • Scott Bradner, Vice Chair
  • Vint Cerf, Trustee
  • John Curran, President & CEO
  • Paul Vixie, Secretary
  • Bill Woodcock, Trustee

Minute Taker:

  • Thérèse Colosi, ARIN

ARIN Staff:

  • Nate Davis, COO
  • Bob Stratton, CFO

ARIN Counsel:

  • Stephen M. Ryan, Esq.

1. Welcome

The Chair called the meeting to order at 10:33 a.m. EST. The presence of quorum was noted, acknowledging that Bill Woodcock would be slightly delayed.

2. Agenda Bashing

The Chair called for comments. Paul Andersen requested Counsel’s report be provided before the discussion of the ARIN budget. The President stated he would prefer Counsel’s report be provided after ratification of Draft Policies, otherwise there may need to be two sessions given by Counsel. Scott Bradner stated that, given the President’s comments, Counsel’s report be provided after the ratification of Draft Policies. The Chair agreed.

3. Approval of the Minutes

It was moved by Vint Cerf, and seconded by Paul Andersen, that:

"The ARIN Board approve the Minutes of 13 October 2011; and, 27 October 2011 Special Meeting of the ARIN Board, as written."

The Chair called for comments. There were no comments.

The motion carried with no objections.

4. Ratification of Draft Policies

At their meeting on 16 November 2011, the ARIN Advisory Council recommended the following Draft Policies for ARIN Board ratification:

A) 2011-1: Inter-RIR Transfers.

It was moved by Scott Bradner, and seconded by Vint Cerf, that:

"The ARIN Board of Trustees takes the recommendation of Draft Policy ARIN-2011-1: Inter-RIR Transfers formally under advisement pending a final community discussion at the ARIN XXIX Public Policy Meeting in Vancouver, British Columbia. Furthermore, the Board of Trustees directs the President immediately start implementation of this policy in parallel, with final policy availability held until otherwise directed by the Board."

The Chair called for discussion. The President pointed out that this motion was not the standard Board adoption motion. He explained that the motion was an option in light of the issues raised by the community regarding the last call process. The extended last call on this Draft Policy (DP) was the result of extensive revisions after the ARIN Public Policy Meeting (PPM). It was a rewrite of the policy for clarity rather than a simple edit. He noted the while the resulting DP does not appear different in function and the rewrite was allowable per the PDP, it may go beyond the scope of what many in the community expected of ‘last call revisions’, and hence could be re-presented to the community if we’re to err on the side of caution. This motion makes it possible for the revised DP to be brought before the community at the next ARIN PPM, but as it will take five to six months to implement, the language in the motion allows for parallel implementation. The President noted that he would support a motion for straight adoption as well, if the Board felt that was preferable. The Board discussed the suggested approach.

Hearing no further discussion, the Chair called the vote.

The motion carried unanimously via roll call.

B) Draft Policy ARIN-2011-8: Combined M&A and Specified Transfers.

It was moved by Scott Bradner, and seconded by John Curran, that:

"The ARIN Board of Trustees, based on the recommendation of the ARIN Advisory Council, and noting that the Policy Development Process has been followed, adopts ARIN-2011-8: Combined M&A and Specified Transfers."

The Chair called for discussion. The President stated this DP was well considered and the PDP was followed. It has the support of the AC. He explained that, as language is currently written, if a party is both selling parts of a business and transferring address space, ARIN would have to penalize them, and force reclamation unnecessarily. He believed the DP was well called for, and he commended the AC for their efforts.

Hearing no further discussion, the Chair called the vote.

The motion carried unanimously via roll call.

C) Draft Policy ARIN-2011-9 (Global Proposal): Global Policy for Post-Exhaustion IPv4 Allocation Mechanisms By the IANA.

It was moved by Scott Bradner, and seconded by Paul Andersen, that:

"The ARIN Board of Trustees, based on the recommendation of the ARIN Advisory Council, and noting that the Policy Development Process has been followed, adopts ARIN-2011-9 (Global Proposal): Global Policy for Post-Exhaustion IPv4 Allocation Mechanisms By the IANA."

The Chair called for discussion. The President explained that this policy provides for address space returned to ARIN to then be returned to IANA for use in the recovered address pool. IANA would then divide the space evenly amongst the Regional Internet Registries (RIRs) for reallocation.

The President pointed out that ARIN currently has a policy that states that returned address space will be made available for reallocation until a global policy is adopted. Following the AC’s recommendation and adopting this global DP will cause ARIN to send a message to the ICANN Board, once it is globally ratified, that ARIN no longer will take returned space and make it available for issuance within the ARIN region.

The President believed the DP was well considered, although it will displace the local policy in the ARIN region. He informed the Board that when this DP does become an adopted global policy, he would ask the Board to agree to return the INTEROP block to IANA.

Vint Cerf asked if this DP applied only to legacy space. The President replied that it applied to all returned address space. Vint, for clarity, stated that even if there is known need to reallocate the returned space, under this DP, ARIN would not reallocate it, but return it to IANA. The President stated that was correct. IANA would redistribute it evenly among the RIRs, and then ARIN could then allocate the space given back as needed.

The President stated he did not foresee much address space being returned; however, he pointed out that there was a perception among the other RIRs that there would be. Scott Bradner pointed out that that perception also existed within the International Telecommunications Union (ITU).

Bill Woodcock joined at this time (10:45 a.m. EST).

The motion carried unanimously via roll call.

D) Draft Policy ARIN-2011-10: Remove Single Aggregate Requirement from Specified Transfer.

It was moved by Scott Bradner, and seconded by Paul Andersen, that:

"The ARIN Board of Trustees, based on the recommendation of the ARIN Advisory Council, and noting that the Policy Development Process has been followed, adopts ARIN-2011-10: Remove Single Aggregate Requirement from Specified Transfer."

The Chair called for discussion. The President stated that this DP was well considered by the AC, recommended by ARIN staff and Counsel, and that it eliminates a restriction on transfers. He believed that it would eliminate problems for some potential transfers and was recommended by unanimous vote by the AC.

The motion carried unanimously via roll call.

The President asked for a point of order for clarity. For avoidance of doubt, further explanation of the “Global Policy for Post-Exhaustion IPv4 Allocation Mechanisms by the IANA” is warranted. The President had stated that returned space would be sent to IANA, and it would be reissued among the RIRs per the mechanism created by the global policy.

He clarified that there is an expectation that ARIN will use the policy to return recovered address space to the IANA address space, for addition to the recovered address space pool. However, the policy does not mandate that ARIN return address space to the IANA. ARIN has stood on the principal that it may set policy regarding returned address space registered within our region. This global policy will only create a mechanism to return address space to the IANA, but does not mandate ARIN to do so. In the meantime, the ARIN community passed a policy for ARIN to make returned address space available for issuance in the region, which will be preempted by adoption of this global policy. In summary, this DP does not bind ARIN to return address space to the IANA, but there is an expectation that ARIN would do so. The President stated the Board could make a motion to reconsider the motion in light of his clarification.

Vint Cerf appreciated the President’s clarification stating that it was precisely because of that that he asked the question earlier, but saw no need to reconsider the motion.

The Chair stated that the Board would discuss Item 6 at this time.

6. General Counsel Update

General Counsel provided an attorney-client privileged briefing to the Board on ARIN legal matters.

The Chair resumed the agenda with Item 5.

5. 2012 Budget Review & Approval

The Treasurer stated that the Finance Committee (FinCom) had met earlier this month to discuss the 2012 ARIN budget.

It was moved by Paul Andersen, as Treasurer, and seconded by Scott Bradner, that:

"The ARIN Board of Trustees approves the FY 2012 Budget as recommended by the Finance Committee."

The Chair called for discussion. The Treasurer and President reviewed the base budget with several options presented by the FinCom on RPKI. He explained the budget included the option for some acceleration of work on RPKI so that ARIN is not stalled, but does not have ARIN taking a leadership role in the effort, which would be much more costly. He noted that the community expressed need at the last ARIN PPM for prioritization of the WhoWas initiative. WhoWas is currently in trial as a manual process, and the budget includes an investment for ARIN automating it. It is at the top of the list of projects, per the community’s feedback.

The Chair asked for clarity what option the Board was approving – a moderate RPKI effort, or an accelerated one? The Treasurer explained the FinCom recommended the minimal option but that the motion could be amended. Scott Bradner suggested that a second motion could also be made. The Chair sought discussion and approval of the base budget, and then a discussion on RPKI.

Scott Bradner stated that the FinCom supported the base budget. The Treasurer stated that ARIN is making good investments and producing good work on automation. It was money well spent. Bill Woodcock stated he agreed with the recommendation. Paul Vixie believed it should be approved.

Hearing no further discussion, the Chair called the vote.

The motion carried unanimously via roll call.

The Chair requested discussion on whether ARIN should work on RPKI following the fully accelerated option or not. Scott Bradner stated that the FinCom discussed it, and they did not recommend it. He believed this important to bring to Board’s attention because the issue has considerable public attention and the Board should be aware of the decision as to the speed in which RPKI is implemented.

Vint Cerf asked what is it was that led the FinCom to conclude that it was not advisable? Scott Bradner stated that, in his case, there were two reasons: 1) Cost. It did not seem to match the community’s view with regard to how ARIN spends its money; and, 2) He did not believe that global roll out would be seriously affected, if at all, by the delay. The Treasurer agreed stating that it also required a full time employee, rather than contractors. He pointed out that there is a challenge for talent in this area.

Bill Woodcock stated that there was clear direction from membership and that given no success has been seen elsewhere, he did not see the need to spend the money on the fully accelerated option. The President stated that the ARIN management team’s recommendations align with these comments. He pointed out that it would not cost too much to continue with RPKI, to do hosted and up/down protocol in early 2012. He noted that if ARIN were to drive the effort as fast as some members of the community might want, ARIN would be taking a leadership role via the fully accelerated RPKI option, including leading documentation in the IETF, adding a full-time employee, and additional contract development.

Paul Vixie expressed that RPKI remains important but he did not see the need for the fully accelerated option at this time. He noted that he did consider it important to make staff time available for time with the IETF if needed, or ARIN will end up with a less than desirable result.

The Treasurer pointed out that the proposal in the base budget reflects minimal acceleration to RPKI to ensure that other important ARIN projects (such as WhoWas) can proceed without further impact to RPKI. The President stated that ARIN is continuing with RPKI, but that the resultant dates are going to be the end of the first quarter for hosted RPKI, and summer of 2012 for up/down protocol. He acknowledged that these dates were later than what ARIN previously anticipated, but ARIN is not burning money to do it. He believed it to be a prudent approach. It was the sense of the Board that the minimal acceleration option as included in the adopted budget was acceptable.

6. General Counsel Update

Previously discussed.

7. IPv6 Fee Waiver Expiration

It was moved by Scott Bradner and seconded by Paul Andersen, that:

"The ARIN Board of Trustees extends the current IPv6 Fee Waiver of 25% for IPv6 Registration Services Fees though 31 December 2012."

The Chair called for discussion. The Treasurer stated that he supported this motion. The President explained that he anticipates a revised fee schedule for 2012, considering both Board input and community feedback from the last ARIN PPM. However, there would be a temporary bump in fees when the 25% IPv6 fee waiver expires at the end of 2011. The smallest members will see a net increase, which ARIN intends to fix in 2012, but this temporary bump in fee could cause the smaller members to return IPv6 allocations to avoid this increase and inhibit deployment IPv6. He pointed out that the financial impact extending the present waiver would be nominal to ARIN.

Hearing no further discussion, the Chair called the vote.

The motion carried unanimously via roll call.

8. Internet Governance Update

The President provided an informational briefing to the Board regarding the ITU’s World Council on Information Technology (WCIT) and its upcoming meeting in December 2012. He noted that there is a big push to rewrite the ITRs (International Telecommunication Regulations) to consider Internet traffic and settlements of traffic. Scott Bradner pointed out that issues run deeper than this with proposals on the table for the ITU to manage aspects of the Internet ecosystem.

9. GS-PID Discussion

The President stated that Richard Shockey, Chairman of the Global SIP Forum, approached him regarding an Internet draft within the IETF to assign global service provider ids – an 8-digit number - to identify service providers for SIP termination. This is believed to be essential by the SIP Forum, for transitioning the global PSTN to using IP based trunks for call handoff. He pointed out that the draft’s IANA section is presently blank and that Mr. Shockey requested that the President confer with the other RIRs about handling this effort. The President met with the other RIRs in Miami recently, and had a good discussion. It was generally agreed that Internet Drafts should not have blank IANA sections, and some specific proposal for handling these identifiers should be inserted into that section.

Bill Woodcock stated that similar information is already maintained in the ITAD directory (Internet Telephony Administrative Domain). Scott Bradner suggested the President send the SIP Forum this feedback, and to ask them why the ITAD cannot be used. The President agreed.

Scott stated he was impressed with Bill’s knowledge of this obscure directory. Bill explained that essentially the numbers are ASN’s for voice calls and available to everyone.

The Chair asked the President to report back to the Board when he had an answer. The President agreed to do so.

10. Any Other Business

The Chair called for any other business. There were no further comments.

11. Adjournment

The Chair entertained a motion to adjourn at 12:06 p.m. EST. Scott Bradner moved to adjourn, seconded by Vint Cerf. The meeting was adjourned with no objections.