16 January 2003
- Alec Peterson, Chairman (AP)
- Bill Darte (BD)
- Ron da Silva (RD)
- Avi Freedman (AF)
- Sanford H. George (SHG)
- Mark Kosters (MK)
- Kevin Martin (KM)
- Lea Roberts (LR)
- John Sweeting (JS)
- Stacy Taylor (ST)
- Cathy Wittbrodt (CJW)
- Suzanne Woolf (SW)
Absent: Dawn Martin
ARIN Staff Attendees
- Ray Plzak, ARIN President (RP)
- Richard Jimmerson, ARIN Director of Operations (RJ)
- Therese Colosi, ARIN Recording Secretary
- Election of Chairman
- Agenda Bashing
- Formal Approval of the Minutes of November 22, 2002
- Status of Policy Proposal 2002-2: Experimental Internet Resource Allocations
- Status of Policy Proposal 2002-3: Micro-Assignments for Multi-Homed Networks
- Status of Policy Proposal 2002-5: Amnesty Requests
- Status of Policy Proposal 2002-6: Aggregation Requests
- Status of Policy Proposal 2002-7: Micro-assignments for Multi-homed Organizations
- Status of Policy Proposal 2002-8: Privatizing POC Information
- Appointment of new AC member
- Current IPv6 Policy discussion
- RWHOIS Servers
- Policy issues from 69/8 experience
- Allocation of v4 space to RIRs
- Allocation of v6 space to RIRs
- Allocation of AS numbers to RIRs
- Policy Proposal Template
- Any Other Business
AP called the meeting to order at 4:04 p.m. EST. Roll call was taken, and the presence of a quorum was noted.
2. Election of Chairman
AP opened the floor for nominations. BD nominated JS, and this was seconded by ST. AF nominated AP, and this was seconded by RD. There were no other nominations. A roll call vote was taken with 9 voting in favor of AP to continue as Chairman, and 2 votes for JS. AP abstained from the vote, and JS voted for AP.
3. Agenda Bashing
4. Formal Approval of the Minutes of November 22, 2002
BD moved that the ARIN Advisory Council adopt the minutes of November 22, 2002 meeting as written. This was seconded by MK. There being no objections, the motioned carried.
5. Policy Proposal 2002-2: Experimental Internet Resource Allocations.
At the November 22, 2002 AC teleconference the AC decided to return this proposal to the PPML for further discussion and consideration. LR, BD, and JS had volunteered to work with the author.
JS updated the AC on the status of this proposal. He stated that an email had been sent to the author and that the author reported he was working with RP and the IETF to re-draft the proposal. RP stated that this would be discussed at a meeting in Amsterdam of the RIR/IAB/IETF liaison group and that he would report back to the AC. RP further stated that this would also be discussed during the ARIN Public Policy meeting in Memphis, TN in April and would report back to the AC.
6. Policy Proposal 2002-3: Micro-Assignments for Multi-Homed Networks
At the November 22, 2002 AC teleconference the AC requested the ARIN staff to send a letter to the author(s) on re-drafting this proposal.
RJ provided a status report. He stated that a letter had been sent and they have responded to RJ, AP, and BD. BD sent out a suggested format for re-drafting the proposal, and discussion took place on what would go into the proposal. He stated that he recommended that the authors review his policy proposal guidelines as a basis for their re-writing and encouraged them to post the new draft policy to the ppml.
7. Policy Proposal 2002-5: Amnesty Requests
The November 22, 2002 AC teleconference the AC decided to return this proposal to the PPML for further discussion and consideration. ST volunteered to shepherd the proposal.
ST provided status on this proposal stating that much correspondence took place on the list regarding the issue of the laundering of blocks and the issue of SPAM. She stated that she reworded the policy so it contains the same content as the original, but makes sense in English, and the proposal will be sent back out for further discussion. It was not augmented with new concepts discussed on the ppml.
8. Policy Proposal 2002-6: Aggregation Requests
At the November 22, 2002 AC teleconference the AC decided to return this proposal to the PPML for further discussion and consideration. BD volunteered to shepherd the proposal.
BD provided an update stating that this proposal was sent out and also received a considerable amount of discussion on wordsmithing and where this proposal was heading. The recovery of address space was also discussed. BD expressed that he would restate this proposal, and resend to the list for further discussion.
9. Policy Proposal 2002-7: Micro-assignments for Multi-homed Organizations
At the November 22, 2002 AC teleconference the AC requested the ARIN staff to draft a letter to the author(s) on re-drafting this proposal.
RJ provided an update stating that, similar to the 2002-3 proposal, a letter had been sent but the author has not responded. He stated that this proposal was almost identical to 2002-3. AP stated that the authors did recognize the ambiguity of the address space issue, and it is being addressed in new draft of proposal 2002-3.
RJ stated that there was an interest for the authors of the two proposals to work together, but the author of 2002-7 had ceased participating. CJW asked if 2002-7 was still a policy proposal if the author is not responding. BD responded stating that the nature of the two proposals was so similar that they intersected, and suggested abandoning this proposal, and focus attention on the 2002-3 proposal (which encompasses most of 2002-7). All were in favor of this suggestion.
RP requested that AC send a recommendation to Board.
AP entertained a motion to approve. BD moved that Policy Proposal 2002-7 be recommended to the Board for elimination from consideration due to the similarity between 2002-7 and 2002-3 and the ambiguity associated with them which makes them indistinguishable, and the failure of the author of Policy Proposal 2002-7 to respond to attempts by ARIN staff to elicit further action and clarification by the author. This was seconded by ST. A roll call vote was taken with all in favor. The motion carried.
10. Policy Proposal 2002-8: Privatizing POC Information
At the November 22, 2002 AC teleconference the AC requested that ARIN staff post implementation information to the list for clarification. JS volunteered to speak with the author to get the proposal re-drafted and completed.
JS stated that the author, Tanya Hinman (TH) would re-write the proposal and request it be posted to the list for further discussion. RJ stated that he did attempt to contact TH but could not reach her. His intention is to post implementation information with the new draft. JS stated he would inform the author.
11. Appointment of Interim Member to the ARIN AC
Due to Barbara Roseman's resignation, an interim member needed to be appointed. It was stated that Dana Argiro had received more than 5% of the total votes in the recent election. ST moved that Dana Argiro serve as an interim member of the ARIN AC. This was seconded by JS. All were in favor and the motion carried. RP stated that ARIN would contact Dana to accept nomination and upon acceptance, the Board would discuss to approve.
12. Current IPv6 Policy discussion
There has been discussion lately about the current IPv6 allocation policy. A modification to the current policy has been proposed on the ARIN public policy mail list. The AC needs to facilitate this discussion to ensure that it follows the ARIN Internet Resource Policy Evaluation Process.
JS stated he felt the discussion was following the policy evaluation process, and that ARIN needs to post it to the PPML. RJ stated ARIN could formalize this discussion by assigning it an ID number and post it to the list for feedback. RP stated it was his opinion that the issue of fees should be separated from the proposal because fees are a membership issue. BD felt that AC should post this suggestion out to the public. It was agreed that the AC would do this.
13. Operational RWhois Server Policy
RWhois is used by ARIN subscriber members to report utilization. On the average, approximately only 25% of these servers are available all the time. This negates the visibility of the reassignment information that could be used for trouble-shooting. Should there be a policy requiring that these servers be operationally available all the time? MK felt strongly that the servers be available all the time, and volunteered to formulate a policy proposal. All were in agreement. MK stated he would draft a policy proposal for the AC within the next 2 weeks.
14. Policy Issues from 69/8 Experience
The recent discussion concerning the routability of addresses in 69/8 have raised policy implications (both global and regional), procedural issues, and training implications.
BD asked if there was any plan on how to determine how badly they are corrupted. MK stated there was a delta between the time it's opened to the time its allocated from. There were bigger questions in terms how quickly IANA could return the space to get rid of this delta. RP stated that this issue was a candidate for global policy because it affects the interactions between the IANA and the RIRs.
RP requested the AC volunteer to work with ARIN to take the results of the analysis and decide what is a regional or global policy issue, or what issues are candidates for training and procedures that should be done within ARIN, with the results given back to the AC as a whole. AF, JS, and BD volunteered for the task.
BD then asked if any testing for routability was done on these addresses. RP stated that the ones that come back are slated for the bottom of the queue. RJ explained that in some instances where returned addresses were used quickly, ARIN does make sure the space is not announced before its allocated. He suggested that the RIRs announce the space themselves and see if they run into any problems. AF stated that he has set up reachability tests, and could informally provide this information to ARIN to determine what networks would not be able to reach the space.
15. Global Policy
In the course of the discussion of ICANN reform, global policy has been defined as any policy that cannot be implemented by one RIR independent of the other RIRs. Generally speaking this would apply to the activities of the IANA in relation to the RIRs.
a. Allocation of IPv4 space to RIRs.
b. Allocation of IPv6 space to RIRs.
c. Allocation of AS Numbers to RIRs.
RP stated that item a. Allocation of v4 space to RIRs was already discussed under item #14 above. On item b. Allocation of v6 space to RIRs, RP suggested that the AC read RIPE document #261 on IPv6, written by Axel Pawlik of RIPE NCC, Paul Wilson of APNIC and RP. He noted that the LIRWG list at RIPE has been discussing this document and suggested the AC should take this on as well and look at putting out a policy proposal to the ARIN region. On item c. Allocation of AS numbers to RIRs, RP felt the AC needed to discuss this issue. SW, BD, AF and JS volunteered to work on it. RJ stated a procedure document had already been drafted regarding resource requests by the RIRs to the IANA and that work was currently underway to get that finalized. RP advised that they define the policy separate from the procedures in order to keep discussions focused.
16. Policy Proposal Template
The issue was whether the AC should move forward with suggesting a format for policy proposals to be used in the future. BD stated that he sent out a document to the AC list based on the discussion on the PPML. Suggestions were given on what would go into a template. He felt it was heading in the right direction and that the template seems like a good idea. RP stated that the Board tasked Scott Bradner (SB) to work on it as well. RP suggested BD get in touch with him. BD requested the AC review the document and forward comments to him for consolidation and he would provide it to SB within the next couple of weeks. All agreed.
17. Any Other Business
RP reminded the AC that the next ARIN meeting will be held April 6-9, 2003 in Memphis and announced that the ARIN meeting in the fall will be held October 22-24, 2003. The location has not yet been confirmed.
RP stated that since CLEW no longer exists, there is still the need for input in the area of training. He proposed the AC identify a point of contact to work with ARIN staff on training plans and get it back to the AC. BD volunteered.
RP also stated that ARIN was beefing up secretariat support. The AC thanked ARIN for their efforts.
RP provided a brief update to the AC on the ICANN meeting held in Amsterdam in December.
The Chair reminded everyone of the next teleconference to be held in March, on the 27th (Thursday) at 4:00 p.m. EST.
The Chair entertained a motion to adjourn at 5:01 p.m. EST. CJW moved to adjourn and this was seconded by ST. The motion carried unanimously.