Table of Contents
- Opening and Announcements
- ARIN Financial Report
- ARIN Reports - Engineering Activities
- ARIN Reports - Government Affairs and Public Policy Support
- ARIN Reports - Registration Services
- ARIN Reports - Human Resources and Administration
- ARIN Reports - Communications and Member Services
- ARIN Reports - Financial Services
- ARIN Reports - Outreach Efforts
- ARIN Advisory Council Report
- ARIN Board of Trustees Report
- Open Microphone
- Closing Announcements and Adjournment
John Curran: Good morning. Welcome to Atlanta. This is our Member Meeting where we discuss the business of ARIN. We have an agenda which everyone should have in front of them. That's the agenda we'll be using for today.
I have a couple of announcements. First, if you go to the microphones, please speak clearly and identify yourself. Voting remains open. If you're voting on the ARIN Board of Trustees or Advisory Council elections, please make sure you do that promptly. If you have any questions, you can visit Jud at the election help desk for assistance with that.
Today's agenda: The ARIN Financial Report, ARIN Department Reports, our Advisory Council Report, and the Board of Trustees.
At the head table I have the Board of Trustees: Scott Bradner, our treasurer -- oh, plus -- plus John Sweeting, Chairman of the ARIN Advisory Council. So Scott Bradner; John Sweeting; Paul Andersen; Lee Howard -- I'll get there -- Bill Woodcock; Paul Vixie, our chairman; and myself.
And I had someone ask me last night -- they asked me a little bit about NANOG and ARIN, or NewNOG and ARIN, and I just want to make clear to everyone, yes, we have meetings that we try to coordinate with NewNOG. We do one a year. It's usually our fall meeting, which is in the US. Our spring meetings we try to reach out to other sectors in the ARIN region, so we try to do Caribbean or we try to do Canada. But we have been working with NewNOG. With respect to meetings, we make it clear we're happy to do more meetings together, but that's really a NANOG decision. The extent you want that or don't want that, get involved in the NANOG organization and they can decide how much alignment or nonalignment with ARIN is appropriate.
We are supporting a little bit the transition of the community to its own self structure. ARIN did agree to provide a bridge loan, effectively, to get started for NewNOG. That is a loan of -- for the executive director -- payments for an executive director spot. It's an 18-month $180,000 loan. It's done in six $30,000 increments. All of these become due 25 months after they're paid, all six of them, and they're payable at 2 percent. It's a fairly arm's length, normal loan term. It's just at reasonable rates. We're doing it because we actually know who they are, even though they may be a completely new organization for financial firms, from our perspective, we actually know who they are, we know what they're doing, we can understand their business plan. It would be very difficult for them to get started. And an organization like that actually has to get started a good year or so in advance in making sure it has meetings and an executive director and contracts for hotels and all those other wonderful things. So if we weren't there to help, it might not happen to that extent. So I just wanted to clarify that. ARIN and NewNOG are two separate operations. But ARIN, we need an operator forum to be active and vibrant in this region, because it's one of the reasons and one of the ways we get feedback on our policies and how they affect the operator community.
I didn't have any other real important things come up, so that concludes my announcements. I'll now move into the reports. The first thing I'll have is have Scott Bradner, ARIN's treasurer, come up and give the ARIN financial report.
Scott Bradner: Good morning. Is anybody here? So I'm going to give a little report of the treasurer's report, not the financial report, but it includes numbers.
Next slide. Okay. So this is what the financial committee's been doing. The financial committee is a subcommittee of the Board. We've been doing this for the Board. Reviewed the financial audit that the professional auditors perform for us, which, by the way, is a nice, clean audit. It said there were no issues that anybody had with what the staff had been doing on the financial side. And the FinCom recommended that the full Board accept the audit, and the full Board did so.
We reviewed the regulatory filings, primarily the 990 Form, which the IRS and the US is being quite aggressive in trying to get more information about nonprofits out there into the public. And so now the 990 Form includes information that it did not previously about the compensation of some of the higher level people, better paid people -- I guess that's higher level -- within ARIN. There are rumors that that's because they're going to try and do some taxing of nonprofits at some point in the future. If you're paranoid, then worry about the 990 Form. But for any of you, who are part of nonprofits, they are getting quite aggressive with the 990s, the IRS is, and they're getting quite sticky.
So we reviewed that. We recommended a bunch of changes. And they turned some of the sentences from legalese into English and things like that, and they made the changes and we approved that. The rules are that some committee of the Board or the Board must review the 990 and then every member of the Board must receive a copy of it. That's the IRS rules. So that's what we did.
Reviewed the insurance. Recommended some changes on that. Insurance for things like events, event insurance and things like that. Discussed the fees, ARIN fees, and voted for a planning session on that. Have no particular results that have come out of that yet.
We did review the loan document that John just referred to about the loan for the executive director for NewNOG, recommended a few changes in that, and they made those changes, and then we recommended the Board approve that.
And we've been using the same auditor for five years -- I think it is, Bob -- six years, which is a little longer than sort of the best practice is to use a single auditor. They get too familiar, too friendly with the folks. And so we want a new set of eyes. We put out an RFP, and we received seven -- a total of nine responses on that, ranging from quite reasonable price to not quite so reasonable. As a matter of fact, not very reasonable at all. And so we've cut out the two top costs, and we're doing the -- looking at the references for the others.
It is interesting that if you're going to be giving reference, the name of somebody to call up as a reference, one hopes that you pick them carefully so they don't say bad things about you, but they don't say all perfect things either. So it's an interesting thing. But so far we've gotten good responses. Or, more particularly, Bob has gotten good responses. And hopefully we'll pick new auditors soon, certainly in time for auditing this year's books.
Next slide. Wanted to put up a slide of our reserves. The Board gave general direction to have one and a half, two years' worth of reserves, just in case we run into another economic downturn of some kind we have some cushion to work on. We're also spending out of the reserves, which was a decision the Board made a few years ago, that we didn't -- we thought that the reserve level was sufficient to give us the cushion and that we didn't want to be adjusting the fees up and down all the time in order to just balance. So we're taking some money out of the reserves. What we're seeing here is the sum total of the reserves. You can see in 2008 it wasn't a good year for the accounts that we had and we lost a bunch of money there. We made it all back in the first half of the next year. So it's been pretty good.
Next slide. So this is the sum total. So if you don't like charts, we have the numbers here, net to the reserves last year. And last year we put money into the reserves, even though we thought we were going to take money out. It wound up that the budget -- the budget was just that we didn't spend all of the money that we thought we were going to when we actually added to the reserves. We made a profit on the investments. And so it went up pretty well. Had a good year that year. And at the end of 2009, the reserves are 23 million, about a year and a half's worth.
And this is what the -- the reserves are put into different components for a legal defense fund that we hope we don't have to use. But it's there in case the legal climate changes. We have the legal defense fund reserve. We have an operating reserve for sort of day-to-day dipping into if we need to and a long term reserve in case of a downturn that we can tap. So total of reserves, 24 million something.
The other thing I wanted to put up here is how we're doing against budget. The budget's available. It's online. But wanted to give a projection of how we're matching up to what the original budget was, and the bottom line is that we're running considerably under expense than we thought we were going to. The areas where we're running under is personnel. A couple of positions were empty for a short time. And the employee training was a little under budget. Comes out of personnel expense. Disaster recovery system was incorporated into an existing colocation rather than having to find a new one. So that saved a bunch of money. The maintenance and operations we actually over budgeted. And so we're not spending all of the budget, which is fine. Depreciation, this is when you put some new developed software into operation, you start depreciating it. And it's been a delay in putting some of this into operation. So depreciation's not been eaten into quite as much as expected.
You folks are paying your bills better. So the bad debt expense is about .6 percent write off, and we thought it was going to be higher than that. So keep up the good work. Pay your bills.
Research and development, which is -- there's a fund by which each of the Board members can ask for special research to be done on things of interest to the Board members and hopefully to the community. And we budgeted quite a bit of money for this. And not all the Board members have asked for research to be done, so that money is not happening. Some of the consulting and consultants were reclassified to capitalization. That's how the rules work. We classify them. And there's been less outreach than budgeted. But, all in all, all of those things together, plus the fact the contingency budget is meant to be only used in case of contingency, and we haven't used it yet or haven't used much of it yet, that we're well under what we thought we were going to be, couple of million dollars under. And the revenue is a little bit over, the projections for it.
Any questions? Regaled you with too many numbers and put you to sleep.
John Curran: Thank you.
John Curran: Thank you, Scott. We'll now go into departmental reports. And the first report is Mark Kosters doing the Engineering report.
Mark Kosters: So good morning, everybody. So who was here from the Toronto meeting? All right. So what was the one thing you took home from that meeting from the Engineering report?
Unidentified Speaker: The ducks.
Unidentified Speaker: Goose. Geese. Geese hate Mark.
Mark Kosters: Geese hate Mark. Well, I have some happiness to report this time, and that is there is no goose attacks this season, and I was not the only engineer that actually rode his bike to work. There are actually two other engineers that actually periodically rode their bikes to work as well. I'm very happy to say that we all made it safely through the season and this presentation is certified fowl-free. That was not good, was it?
Mark Kosters: So I was thinking about how can one make it funny. And Andy Newton is actually from Georgia, and Andy said, "Hey, we should put some redneck jokes in there. "
John Curran: Nice try.
Mark Kosters: So they were taken out. So what I'd like to do is, as we go through this, I want you to think of your own and we can talk about them afterwards.
Mark Kosters: So within Engineering, we've had a pretty significant surge over the last year and a half. There's been an incredible amount of work that has to be done. So if you think about this, when you're trying to move -- when you're trying to really overhaul the entire system and keep it running, making sure that your services are taken care of and upgrade them, it takes a tremendous amount of work. It's much harder to do this than it is to actually start to do a startup, where you're starting all from scratch. And as you build these systems, you have to encounter all these legacy questions that have come up that were put in that were undocumented, you weren't sure what they meant, and nobody seems to know themselves why we did this until after you put it out and say, well, that's why we did this - we made this particular decision back in 1985. So there's been a lot of work to do, and we've actually hired a number of contractors on staff to actually help us.
And you can see this on the staffing here. In terms of the number of people that we have, Operations is actually contractor-free right now, and that's headed by Matt Ryanczak, does a great job. Development. Andy, he loves contractors, so he just has a bazillion of them. And Tim Christensen has Quality Assurance, and he has three contractors himself. Requirements is Erika Goedrich. And of course myself. And maybe I should be a contractor too. I don't know.
John Curran: You can do that.
Mark Kosters: We can do that.
So Operations, what's going on here. So one of the big sort of headlines -- and this is a little foreshadowing -- is keeping up with Whois-RWS traffic. We'll get into this in a little bit. Next thing is that they've been working on is end-of-life equipment and installing a PFS-lite site in Canada. You may say to yourself: What is PFS-lite? I don't quite understand. I totally understand that. PFS stands for public facing services. And what we're doing is we're putting out nodes around our region that serves our public facing services, so things like Whois, things like eventually web information, as well as DNS. They're all served by these PFS sites. Now, a PFS-lite site is a DNS-only site. And what we hope to do in the near future is start anycasting this along with a Caribbean site that we plan on putting up as well. So we've been working on that. We've had a couple of challenges, especially in the Caribbean area, trying to find a site that was suitable and actually would actually give us a call back. But I think we actually found one that's suitable and is willing to call us back, and we're working towards making that goal happen.
And, finally, as we're building on these systems, there's a huge influx of software that hasn't yet been deployed that needs to be tested, put through QA, staged, to make sure we've actually done this right so when we roll it out we don't say: Oh, my gosh, what happened here? Why didn't we catch this? That we can actually catch it beforehand and so you don't see any sort of disruptions in service. So the Operations crew has been doing a tremendous job keeping up.
So here you can see the v6 stats for Whois-RWS. What's interesting about this is here we're on this whole kick of, "Hey, everybody has to go to v6", and look at what happened to our v6 traffic; it dropped. And at one point the highest point that it was at was .2 percent of our total Whois traffic. Now it's .02 percent of our total Whois traffic. So it's not like the site's not available. But what's interesting about it is that it doesn't have a huge amount of use.
So at the last meeting I talked about Whois-RWS in terms of the interesting things that we're seeing. At ARIN XXV we had this thing called self-referential queries going on, people asking for their IP addresses of themselves. And they were what are called singleton queries. So they came into our service once, asked the query, left, and never came back. It was increasing over the last year. What's interesting about this is right after we reported this at the last ARIN meeting it actually started going down. Now it's in the noise.
So we talked to various people about this and said -- within the security community and what is it, and one of the ideas was it's a botnet, and the bots are actually using this to do whatever they're going to do with this information. But there was really no -- first of all, there's really no defense for this. You really can't stop this sort of behavior.
By the time the query comes through, the expensive part of our service is actually done. And so we might as well allow that traffic through and allow it to happen. And when we did this, we actually had to scramble within Operations. We had a whole bunch of machines in our PFS sites that were at that point not being used heavily. We had to upgrade all the CPUs in those machines as well as turn them all on to the point where we just barely made our power requirements. We actually started tripping breakers as we were bringing these machines on. So we were very close to the edge when servicing this information. So at that point Andy was working very hard with his team with Whois-RWS. So we deployed Whois-RWS back in July. It was running great. And if you looked at this graph -- is there one of those pointer things on this?
John Curran: Yes. I'll show you where.
Mark Kosters: Oh, it's a light saber. All right.
John Curran: The front one, the one that looks like a laser.
Mark Kosters: So what's interesting is this, what happened right here. So that is September 6, this huge increase in traffic. And Andy came to my office that Tuesday, because Monday was, of course, a holiday. . Matt came to my office, the head of Operations, on Tuesday and said, "Look at this. What the heck is going on? " And it was interesting to see all the traffic that started flowing towards our site.
And this is interesting in a couple of different cases. One, it's pretty consistent sort of behavior that happened before. It was diurnal: kind of goes up during the day and goes down at night, comes up during the day. But with this increase we still have a diurnal pattern, but it's more sort of enhanced. So we kind of looked around and said, okay, what's going on? Well, one of the interesting things is that Google announced an OpenID collaboration with Yahoo! on that Tuesday. The traffic started Monday night. So we thought, naturally, hey, this could be kind of interesting. And as we started looking at the queries, the IP addresses that were coming through were asking for the login servers for these various social services that provide OpenID services. And this is -- we sent it to various people within their various organizations and say, hey, do you know anything about this? And nobody knows what's causing this to occur. And we got to keep on looking at this. And this is the only pattern that we found so far, on what's causing this behavior.
And in this slide that I put together -- it's actually a little bit out of date. And here I say we're seeing about 5600 queries per second. Last week we saw over 7,000 queries per second. Now, it settled down a little bit now and we got it down a good deal underneath, back by 5600 queries per second. But that's a significant increase from where we were before. So I've been at ARIN for three years. When I came to ARIN, we at that point could handle 150 queries per second. Now we're handling -- we could do a good deal more than this. Don't try it, please.
Mark Kosters: We can handle a significant amount more queries than this, but a number of questions comes up. So if we can't figure out the root cause of this, how far do we keep on going? How many servers do we keep on adding on? How many sites do we keep on putting together? This becomes an expensive endeavor on multiple fronts. And since -- this is a question for you all in terms of what we should do. Do we keep it ongoing?
So here's a slide that kind of shows it all in terms of our query load. It's always kind of going up to the right. Now it's going massively up to the right. Now, hopefully it's going to settle down, but who knows what's going to happen here. But one of the things that I'm very proud of is both Operations and Engineering coming up with software solutions and being able to deploy this with very little sort of impact to you guys. Sure, there's been a couple of cases where there's been a service unavailable, which is a sort of degradation of service for us, it keeps us from having the machines start to crash, but at least we can keep up with the majority of the load.
And one of the reasons why you see this is Whois-RWS is actually a fairly complex piece of code. I know this because I wrote a Whois server that was deployed about 50,000 years ago. And you have to handle multiple query types. And you have to do it in a very efficient manner. And Whois-RWS actually does that. And usually when you put out complex code like that you have some bugs. It's not like we didn't have any, but there's really very few that the community actually saw or dealt with. We have a few that we're dealing with the Web services to make it more user-friendly that we plan on putting out, but it's actually -- overall, it's actually not too bad for version 1.0 coming out the door. And a good part of that is the QA department putting it on.
Since then also we've had four ARIN Online releases since ARIN XXV. And here are the particular functions that have been added in. So the biggest ones that you would probably -- aside from the RESTful Whois service is the bulk Whois download which includes API key so that you can actually automate it -- in an automated fashion retrieve this information. And the last thing is the Specified Transfer Listing Service that is put out as well.
So Andy talked about this in terms of structural changes yesterday. Now, he was kind of tired. He was kind of losing his voice. And we need your help on this as well. We're going to have some pretty significant structural changes coming up at the end of the year. So there was actually an issue with the way that one of our core tables was set up, designed, in our back-end systems. And we had to make this change so we can actually more accurately take care of things like lame delegation and DNS management, and which meant a pretty significant overhaul. All the legacy applications would no longer work after we made this change. So we're working very hard on making that happen. And we really can't support -- we could, but the costs involved in supporting both legacy and the upgraded systems are really -- it's not worth it. But what we tried to do is create a system where the change is going to be minimal for you in terms of putting in your SWIP templates and other systems that you may interface with ARIN.
But one of the big things is that you need to, first of all, give us API -- every submission that you send in, you need to submit an API key that will identify you as an end-user so we can actually validate you through our new system with very minimal template changes. Actually, no template changes other than adding API keys. And all this stuff is documented on our website. The other thing that's changed is nameservers requests will no longer be done in templates; it's going to be done online. The reason for that is there's actually very few -- well, the amount of traffic that comes through this that changes their nameservers is fairly minimal. And there's going to be additional functionality and flexibility that you will have with the online system to make changes that will more accurately reflect your DNS infrastructure internally.
So improved provisioning and zone management are the big things to look for here. There's going to be sort of no backwards compatibility on some of these things. Specifically right now, for example, we support version 3.0 of the templates. Who knows when those came out? I don't. I really don't. It's before -- it's before the dawn of time, I think. So we're no longer going to be supporting 3.0. You're on 4.0 right now. And 4.0 was way before I started at ARIN. So 3.0 is going to go away. There are a few people that still use it. And those templates are -- they're going to be -- frankly, if they don't get the message, they're going to have to retool their systems to make that happen. And this is what we need your help with. You all are a small segment, huge in terms of our customer impact, but small segment of all the people that we deal with. We like to make sure that people are aware of these changes that are coming along online. There are things under the features section of the ARIN website that describes these things. If you know of people that deal with ARIN but don't go to the meetings and don't read the mailing list, please encourage them to look at this so they can prepare themselves for the end of the year.
So one of the things I didn't talk about is RPKI, in terms of what we're doing here. And this came up this week. And one of the things that the Board rightfully does, and I'm going out on a limb here, is that they look at the liability that's associated with new services that we put out. Okay. And with RPKI services that are coming out is that there's the opportunity for increased liability, and the Board needs to look at this very carefully on how to make this happen. And so they're looking at the various risks of this and there are pros and cons for each service that you put out and seeing whether or not we can put it out. And there's going to be a time for you to have input on whether or not these services ought to come out as part of ARIN.
So here you see the zone management interface. I'm sorry I'm jumping around a little bit. But you can see here's the zone management interface you can actually use. And part of the feature set, it gives you actually a drill-down of how you can actually manage the resources both with delegations as well as security extensions using DS records to add to your zones. So at that point DNSSEC will be fully a reality from our /8s downward.
So upcoming challenges that we have -- I'm almost finished -- is moving RPKI into production at some point after the Board looks at these things in detail. And it's specifically dealing with hosted services, whether or not we host your resources and actually sign for your resources, but you yourself don't have your private key. DNSSEC, to be fully implemented, is going to be on -- I think that's going to be a no-brainer because DNSSEC has really come to be and is operationally very significant with roots signed and a bunch of TLDs signed now.
ARIN Online with v4 and v6 resource management. This is one of the things that is going to be coming out in the new release, is that you will -- aside from actually managing your POCs and your ORGs with ARIN Online; you'll actually start to be using ARIN Online to actually manage your IP resources and, of course, the RESTful provisioning that's associated with it. With the templates that are coming out, we're also creating a RESTful interface for that. Now, there's going to be a schema that actually describes this that API designers can actually -- it's the API -- that application designers, coders, can actually use to put out so they can actually automate this in a very easy fashion. But for the most part, all this stuff is backwards compatible, aside from including API keys, so that your existing systems can still work.
Other things that we're looking at is improving the integration of the IRR and looking at various service requests that have been part of the ACSP process for the last couple of years in making that a reality - Whowas service, operational test and evaluation service . By the way, operational test and evaluation service, one of the things that we want to do before we make that happen is that we want to move away from our Oracle database to something that's a little bit more free so that we don't get held hostage by some large vendor who would like to charge us a huge amount of money for having not only production services but OT&E, or operational test and evaluation, services as well. Of course we continually have to replace the legacy gear much like you guys. So any questions?
Owen DeLong: Owen DeLong, Hurricane Electric. Since you know that you're receiving a certain amount of 3.0 templates, is any effort being made to contact the people submitting them directly and let them know that's not going to work anymore?
Mark Kosters: Is Mr. Huberman in the room or Leslie? Can you talk to that?
Leslie Nobile: Actually, sure. I do know that we will put out notification to the community about the three data templates being dropped at some point in advance of doing it. That is in our plan, right? Contacting people directly, I'm not sure that we have that capability. Those templates roll in and I'm not sure we're tracking those.
John Curran: The question that comes up is whether or not we have a way of safely hunting down -- we see the impact of the templates because the system processes them. But we have to somehow intercept them before they're processed to know who would be submitting them, because the change looks, the change to us whether it comes in on 3.0 or 4. So I guess we don't have the system functionality to intercept them right now and make a list of them, if that's what you're asking.
Owen DeLong: I don't think you need to intercept them. I think you have a ticket number that you know was associated with the Web 3.0 address and finding the from address that created the ticket isn't hard.
Mark Kosters: So when we looked at this, just to add a little bit of information to Leslie's statement, we've looked at this in terms of the people who actually send this, and vast majority send 4.0 templates.
John Curran: But Owen's question is specifically: Can we proactively make a list of those people who don't and send them a targeted notice? And I guess I'll take that under advisement to see if it can be done.
Mark Kosters: Anything else?
Carlos Martinez: Hi. This is Carlos from LACNIC. I was wondering about your absolutely crazy Whois traffic graphic. I was wondering if you have performed a source IP address analysis, if you have a breakdown of those IPs originally, countrywise, blockwise, anything.
Mark Kosters: That's a really good question. I talked to the other regional registries to see whether or not they're seeing the same sort of query loads. Because this would be geographically disbursed if it was. The answer is no. It seems to be region specific to ARIN for some reason. And the traffic that we're seeing in terms of the source is all over the place but it's mainly residential customers in the United States.
Carlos Martinez: Basically a distributed native service that you're experiencing?
Mark Kosters: Exactly.
Carlos Martinez: Thank you.
Mark Kosters: You're welcome. One thing under the more research side is we've got to look at that very closely. We just have this huge volume of data to take a look at to try to figure out if we can figure out a pattern and work its way through. And I'm hopeful we can. And we hope to have some more positive results at the next meeting.
Carlos Martinez: I would love to see those results?
Mark Kosters: I'm sorry?
Carlos Martinez: I would love to see those results once you have them.
Mark Kosters: Good point.
Mike Joseph: Mike Joseph, Google. I'm happy to see the direction of ARIN Online moving for online resource management, and just to follow up to a conversation we had the other day, I was wondering if you could comment on when we can expect to see online billing management for billing records and billing contact information.
Mark Kosters: So our roadmap is actually approved through the end of this year. And Engineering actually has for next year -- and this is not something that you can really say authoritatively and take back and say, okay, ARIN is saying that they're going to do it next year. But on ARIN's Engineering roadmap we go a year and a half out. And we have it on -- but it's not been approved by the Board in terms of here's our strategic plan; here are deliverables for the year. We have that through the end of the year right now. And as -- when the Board sees what we plan on doing for next year that is currently on the roadmap for next year but it has not been approved yet.
John Curran: To be clear, the Board gets an insight a year in advance. So they did see we're proposing to do it for next year. But I haven't put the budget together that shows the total dollars and have them sign off on next year's work. But they know it's going to be in the plan that I give to them.
Mike Joseph: Great. Best of luck with that.
Kevin Blumberg: Kevin Blumberg, The Wire. With the growth of your Whois traffic coming in, and, more importantly, the fact that it's -- as you said, very much looks like something similar to a DDOS scenario where it's coming in from all over the place, is there a possibility of having a premium authenticated or a at least by IP restricted access that allows the members to not be concerned about or to lower the chances of a significant DDOS Is that something that you're looking at, having sort of a premium Whois moving forward at some point?
Mark Kosters: That's an interesting idea. Let me actually bounce that around in terms of if we were to support that, how we would do that.
Kevin Blumberg: And the second question is what's the plan with the growth of v6 Whois information? From the meetings that we've been having over the last couple of days, the numbers that we're talking about is not a factor increase; it's an order of magnitude increase that I think blows everybody's minds away. How much bigger can your database go before significant rework is required?
Mark Kosters: I'm trying to understand the question in terms of --
Kevin Blumberg: If the v6 Whois information that you have to now keep increases your database by a billion times --
Mark Kosters: That is really -- the amount of information we actually hold within our database in terms of v6 information, I assume what you're talking about is, look, the actual storage requirements for v6 address is much larger than it is for a v4 address as well as reassignments associated with them. We can handle that. That's not an issue.
Kevin Blumberg: Okay. Thank you.
Mark Kosters: You're welcome.
Rich Lewis: Hi. Rich Lewis, large vendor charging huge amounts of money, Oracle Corporation. I believe we may have a more cost-effective solution for you.
John Curran: We're welcome to hear it.
Mark Kosters: Awesome. Anything else? Great. Well, as I end, I apologize. I'll try to make things more funny next time, if John approves.
John Curran: You've got the nice shirt on, though.
Mark Kosters: I did.
John Curran: Okay. Thank you, Mark.
John Curran: So normally Cathy Handley, Executive Director of Government Affairs and Public Policy, would be doing this presentation. I'm not Cathy. She's probably very thankful for that. I'm going to give the presentation. I'll explain why when I go through the slides.
So recent. Since the last meeting, some of the things we've been involved in. These are events that we've had to go out and work with government policymakers and let them know what's happening in the Internet regional registry system. CITEL, which is policymakers in the Caribbean. World Telecommunications Development Conference. There's an ITU conference for developing countries interested in getting involved and knowing what's happening with Internet, Internet RIRs, and Internet address space.
ICANN. We participate in the ICANN meeting. Obviously a lot of folks at ICANN wish to know what we're doing with our policies, both local and globally, what we're doing with respect to the depletion of IPv4. We've had to make sure that we have more information available. In fact, working with the other Regional Internet Registries, we'll actually be formalizing a policy report at ICANN to make sure that the ICANN attendees, the Board, the government advisory committee that want to know what policies are under discussion have a road map for where those are happening in our region and in other regions of the globe. Not so that they can give us input on those policies in the meeting, but so that they know how to attend or remotely participate at the right forum to give the right input at that time. So we've been doing quite a bit of outreach to make sure we have good working liaisons with these organizations.
ITU IPv6. There was a meeting in March, and then there was a meeting again in September. And, yeah, so the ITU formed a working group which had the purpose of looking at a number of issues with making sure IPv6 addresses were available to everyone, in particular developing countries, and that developing countries wouldn't have to worry about a repeat of what happened with IPv4. I.e. , as they get involved with the Internet, we're beginning to say that we're running out. I'm not sure I fully can give credence to the theory that we're going to run out of v6 addresses before developing countries get a chance to get any. We've actually presented information at this working group showing that everybody who asked for v6 addresses have been able to get them. I'm not aware of any policy that could possibly make it such that we wouldn't have addresses available to everyone, but the premise is that we need to potentially allocate IP addresses by country rather than by Regional Internet Registry, because that's the way that's fair and expected by some of the proponents of this working group. This group has been a joy to attend. I've been at all of them, and it is a great information sharing forum. And I continue to participate, as do the other Regional Internet Registries. We have a little team of us that attends.
The outputs of those working groups -- the working group, the IPv6 ITU working group, has been some study groups whose mission are to better communicate how to get involved in the regional registries. If you are a minister of communications in a small country somewhere, you might have an ISP in your country. You might have a couple. But you, yourself, do not know how those ISPs work. You don't know how they get addresses. You don't know how the address policy is formed. You know how they get phone numbers, because you're involved in that. You know how rates are set for phone calls, because you're involved in that. But you really don't know how the ISPs in your country are providing Internet service. And, in fact, you don't really have any direct involvement in a lot of cases. The outreach that we're doing is trying to educate them how ISPs are getting their job done without necessarily enticing the regulators to help out, because in some cases we don't necessarily need sufficient help. It's a job of just making sure people know where each other are. So it's been a lot of fun.
IGF, Internet Governance Forum. The United Nations spun up something called WSIS which later on ended up resulting in IGF. IGF is a forum which is a nonbinding multi-party stakeholder group which gets together several times a year with its purpose to discuss issues and Internet governance and public policy. These are issues that are wide ranging. This includes children on the Internet. It includes impacts, climate issues and the Internet and intersections. Law enforcement. Internet and nearly any topics you can compare. If you have two topics you can put together, Internet and its impact on the environment, as I said. But there are some issues on governing Internet resources, governing names, trademarks, and governing Internet protocol identifiers. So there are workshops. I actually attended a workshop which talked about RPKI, and we participated in that, as did several of the other RIRs send personnel. And the issue was by rolling out RPKI are we formalizing the regional registries and giving the regional registries effectively control of the Internet routing table, because obviously RPKI certificates, if they're used to validate routes, could indirectly cause implications. It's a good topic. It's actually one that's worth having discussion about. You can go to Team ARIN. You can see my slides. They're there, obviously. You can go to the IGF website. I believe they publish the materials. But it's to make sure that parties that may not be part of the Internet registry system are aware of the policy implications of some of the initiatives we take. It's been productive from that point.
US Federal IPv6 Workshop was actually last Tuesday. ARIN helped work in establishing this, working with NTIA, Department of Commerce, and the US government, to increase awareness of IPv6 in the US federal agencies. OMB rolled out a new policy specifically mandating that federal websites will be IPv6 reachable in addition to IPv4 and that US federal websites shall be reachable in that manner by September 2012. Now, September 2012 sounds like a long time from now. I will tell you that when you start looking at how federal projects work, how they spin up proposals, budget, contract for someone to do the work, have that tested, make sure that that meets federal architecture security requirements, procurement requirements, setting an IPv6 address on an interface can take 14 or 15 months. So it's a fairly prolonged process. But it's necessary, because some of these are fairly significant activities they have to go through.
The panel that we had had the US Federal CTO, which is Aneesh Chopra, and the US Federal CIO, Vivek Kundra. Speakers included large carriers, content providers, large content organizations, and did a great job in producing awareness in the federal community, some of the vendor community, and even some of the business community. Some of the issues that came up is businesses don't necessarily know the impact that running out of v4 addresses are going to have. Telecommunication companies may or may not fully inform their boards or their investors that they've been using IPv4 addresses and there may be a bump in the road next year. So that's something the government's looking at is making sure everyone knows, yes, we have this transition. If you're investing in a telecommunications company, it might be a good idea to understand telecom companies are going to be going through changes next year. So there should be some interesting implications from this forum. ARIN's very happy to have been part of it. We've actually been reached out since then by the folks up in Canada, Industry Canada, and folks in the Caribbean, to do other similar format country-oriented workshops on specifically IPv6 and that country's approach or policy stance on IPv6. So we hope to be doing more of those in the coming years.
Future activities. We have two big ones on the plate for this year. One of them is ICANN. I'm going to skip to the end of the slide. We have an ICANN meeting in Cartagena, Colombia, where we'll be giving an update on where ARIN is along with the other RIRs with policies in that region. As I said, this will be the first regional policy status report that's given at an ICANN meeting and directing people how to get more involved in the RIRs. We could see people from other parts of ICANN, other government advisory folks coming to our meeting because they got directed at this meeting, they get told about the policies we're working on and maybe they'll take interest and we'll see them in our March meeting. Who knows?
The other big thing that's happening is happening right now, Cathy is down in Guadalajara, Mexico. In Guadalajara, ITU is having its plenipotentiary meeting. It's a brief little shindig from October 4th to the 22nd. For those who want to look at that, that's more than three weeks' worth of meeting. And plenipotentiary means imbued with all of the powers of the organization. This meeting actually is a meeting where the ITU gets everyone together once every four years and they can do things like change the charter of the ITU. They can set -- they set the course and the budget work plan for the next four years. There's an ITU council that runs the ITU in between that time. But this truly is a meeting where everything is on the table. This meeting, with everything on the table, has been described by several ITU attendees as the Internet meeting of the ITU. Everything is on the table and there are proposals that have been put on the floor for the ITU to take a more active involvement in the management of critical Internet resources. Now, critical Internet resources include domain names, protocol identifiers, and Internet numbers. Pretty much everything.
We don't know exactly how that's going to work out. These are things that are going to be discussed by the countries, the member states of ITU. Every country gets a vote. There's about 175, 178 member states. We are attending. We're a sector member. We're allowed to be there. We're allowed to be a resource and a support organization. We have several RIRs attending. And on our delegation we have some folks that we've asked from other RIRs who aren't members. But the fact of the matter is that we're sort of outside the meeting helping explain how this is all run, not inside the meeting.
At the end of the day, every country gets one vote. So we don't really know how the ITU will decide on some of these matters. If the ITU makes a decision in some of these areas, because everyone is signatory -- not everyone, but everyone doing telecommunication is signatories, those decisions are binding on the countries at a treaty level. And each country will make laws to enforce the decisions. So there could be decisions that result from that process that would be things ARIN needed to pay attention to or the other RIRs need to pay attention to or ICANN needs to pay attention to, which are not possible to undo or redo by this body, or by any of the RIRs. So we're paying a lot of attention to it. We're trying to educate how we do things today.
One of my colleagues noted that the ITU forges ahead at a snail's pace. So the good news is that things like this happen very slowly. You can't necessarily get out of the way, because they'll move in the direction they're going to move, but you at least see it coming for months or years to come. So we're going to be dealing with this. We also excel -- when it gets down to working groups and actual recommendations with the ITU; we excel in making reality happen. We excel in letting them understand what's really going on. So while we may end up having to liaison with more ITU and ITU working groups if the ITU picks this up at their meeting, that doesn't mean that the output of that liaison necessarily endangers any of the work we do. In theory it could give us new insights, it could help us share perspectives of people who don't make it to an ARIN meeting.So I want to give you a realistic but optimistic view of what's going on. That actually concludes the public policy report. I'll take questions at this time. No one has any questions after that report? I'd have questions. The Board had questions. Yes.
John Curran: It's actually interesting. The OMB released a memo as a result of the US Federal IPv6 Workshop that occurred last Tuesday. Coincident with that, the OMB released a memo issuing new federal guidance including the requirements of websites to be reachable by IPv6. There's actually a requirement for federal infrastructure internally to be using v6 two years later. They're focused on predominantly the end goals and they're not prescriptive about the exact technology. So to in fact -- while I'm not saying they're looking at transitional technology, I guess to say they didn't exclude transitional technology. So to the extent you want to put your website online via v6, via something other than dual stack, as long as the effect is that it's reachable to a broadband customer running v6 only, you would meet their requirements. They didn't dictate particular technologies.
Now, the federal CIO Council has an IPv6 roadmap document. You can go to www.cio.gov for the US CIO Council's document. And that document actually today has some guidance and probably will become more prescriptive as agencies refine that. But OMB said: We see the goal that's necessary for the United States. They didn't prescribe particular technologies, leaving that to the US Federal CIO Council. And, again, ARIN is now beginning to work with other governments throughout our region who are interested in doing similar things.
Lee Howard: Lee Howard, Board of Trustees. You said something to the effect of if you're a minister of telecommunications in a small country you may know who some of the ISPs are because there probably aren't many. But I want to add, if you're the minister of telecommunications in a small country, please contact us.
John Curran: Sure. Absolutely. We'll help you provide that information about how things are going on, how policies are made. Okay. Any other questions? Thank you. Oh, sorry. Yes, far right microphone.
Mike Joseph: Mike Joseph, Google. Sounded like maybe you were concerned or at least aware of proceedings at the ITU that may be setting Internet related policy. Are there specific policy points you have concerns about or that you want us to be aware of?
John Curran: There are no policy points at this point. Absolutely none. The ITU actually works by positioning. So they work by first saying we'd like to liaison with you, and then we want to do joint workshops or we want to have this formal interface, and then they come back and they say we want to share draft documents. And slowly but surely the mechanism can be compared to many things in this world. But slowly, but surely, you are surrounded and infused with ITU-ism.
There is a proposal on the floor of the ITU in Guadalajara at the Plenipot submitted by a country which calls for the creation of an ITU study group, ITU Study Group 20. That study group would, as I understand it as a sector member -- and because we're a sector member I have no problem sharing with the membership of ARIN the essence of that, since we have to respond, but I can't share the document because it's bound to our organization. As I understand that document, it would create a binding interface between ITU Study Group 20 and ICANN, requiring ICANN to receive not advisory guidance, such as the Government Advisory Council presently gives ICANN, but to receive binding recommendations of the study group for implementation. That would be interesting. That means any global policy we submitted to ICANN, for example, could receive binding guidance from ITU 20 to a different outcome. So we're talking about the establishment potentially of mechanisms right now, not particular policy issues. We would see how those mechanisms actually work when we see them exercised over the coming years with particular issues.
The good news, as I said, in ITU study groups, you don't have 180 people which they're there because they're required to be there, much like the Plenipot. The people who show up to the IPv6 working group were about 44 organizations, and of them 20, 30 -- probably 35 of them were very closely aligned with the RIR system, ICANN, and our way of doing things. There were only a handful of organizations that showed up that had a different view. So when it comes down to having an ITU Study Group 20, while we may have to deal with its binding recommendations, hopefully we can have a content-based discussion about the pros and cons of the actual issues in that study group before those recommendations get thrown for implementation to ICANN. Does that help?
Mike: Thank you.
John Curran: We have more questions. Yes.
Masato Yamanishi: My name is Masato Yamanishi, Softbank BB,and I had an additional comment about ITU. Because I was a chair of ITU session in the second to last APNIC meeting. In my understanding concerns from the developing country which is deriving current ITU activity is -- comes from misunderstanding or insufficient acknowledge about current registry, current regional registry activities. So I think sharing our current activity to ITU is very important. Also another problem is very few people have interest with current ITU activity. I mean, it's quite -- almost nothing. Almost nobody has interest to current activity. It is another problem. So please check their documents. Sometimes ITU document is very long and also it has more than 100 bulleted items. So it's quite difficult to read, but please read it and understand what is going on in the ITU.
John Curran: Thank you. Center rear mic.
Suzanne Woolf: Susan Woolf, ISC. Given the, shall we say, exploding length and complexity of the government and public policy updates at the last couple of meetings, it might be good for ARIN to publish for the members a glossary of terms, list of dramatis personae, and perhaps updates on these issues going forward to a page on the site. Or just keep people a little more up to date, because people in this room often know even less about ITU and related bodies than they know about us. And the educational project has to go both ways.
John Curran: I agree. I think that's very important. We've actually tried to do that with our messages. We are somewhat hindered in communicating information about the ITU. An example was the ITU's IPv6 study group was an open group, which meant that parties that were not ITU member states, the actual diplomats of the countries who represent those countries interested in the ITU, and more than sector members, such as ARIN, it was actually invited experts. So, for example, invited experts on this topic were invited to attend the meeting. But the preparatory meetings, the materials for those meetings, the minutes of those meetings, and the draft outputs of those meetings were all precluded from being shared with any of the ARIN membership. So it makes it a little challenging to brief people on issues and where we stand when all we can say is: Look, over there, something's happening. We will try to get as much information out as possible. But even their open working groups have a degree of activity that's hard to share. And their closed working groups, well, I can't say anything.
Suzanne Woolf: That was in fact part of the point, is that this is a very different way of working than we're used to. And we need to be not only talking here but going home to our organizations and communities and talking about how this stuff really works.
John Curran: Right. Very important. Yes, center front.
Tom Zeller: Speaking for remote user Joe Maimon of CHL, he asks: Is this proposal for Study Group 20 the only one before the ITU that is obviously affecting ARIN's work or are there others?
John Curran: That is an incredible question, remarkably astute. I thank Joe for asking it.
John Curran: ARIN, working with other RIRs, other interested parties in Internet governance, such as ISOC, has worked hard to make sure that all of the groups leading up to the Plenipot have had most of their issues in terms of communication, how we work, addressed in their study groups, bringing therefore no other issues to the agenda of the Plenipot. The reason for this is because if you can work out something in a study group, it's best to do it there. You have the most predictable outcome. If you leave an issue for the Plenipot, the meeting of many people who don't get together and have hundreds of topics to deal with over three weeks don't necessarily put a lot of attention and understanding into any one topic. So we'd rather not have an Internet topic beyond the agenda for the Plenipot. To this end, going into the meeting, we did not believe there were any submissions for any item going into the meeting. We did work with some governments. And, in fact, a submission which was sort of the expected submission, a submission that encouraged continuing cooperation the way we have been over the last four years, was submitted to the ITU Plenipot. I don't know whether or not that's still active. It may have been withdrawn. We don't know. Things are a little confusing down there. We put that in or we worked with governments to put that in because we thought it was nice to have a proposal that made plain that continuing cooperation was a good thing.
At this point, it's possible that the only item that they're dealing with down there is the proposal for Study Group 20. And so I don't know of any others, but that one proposal for a study group is more than sufficient to cause us a lot of concern.
Tom Zeller: Tom Zeller, Indiana University and ARIN AC. So as an American citizen I am curious as to how my government interrelates into ITU and who represents what department oversees that. Is that a State Department function? Does the US government -- have you talked to them and do they have any comments or viewpoints going into this meeting?
John Curran: I don't speak for the US government, but I will tell you I know the Department of State has their ambassador down there, we heavily liaison with them, NTIA on Internet issues, the Department of Commerce NTIA, National Telecommunications Information Agency, is heavily involved and they interface with state on these positions. I would tell you that many of the countries that -- in the ARIN region -- Canada, US -- and then many countries in other regions that have similar interests -- UK, Australia, Netherlands -- have all worked together with a lot of cooperation.
The real challenge is that you have literally dozens of countries that are just now waking up to the Internet and don't have a lot of understanding of how the system works, how it goes. We've done extensive outreach. We've worked with 35 governments, all the ones in our region, and many outside the region, to try to provide them that information. But we're not the only ones providing them that information. So I will say the US government has been a strong ally, as has Canada. We have some Caribbean governments that are working from materials we helped prepare to educate them. But purely, numerically, there's dozens, if not more than 100 countries that are not necessarily briefed or have not been well received because they have their own inclinations on how Internet governance should work.
Center rear mic.
David Farmer: David Farmer, University of Minnesota, ARIN AC. As someone whose job depends on political bodies meeting on occasion, I would assume that this body is much like legislature, where until they close the doors you don't really know what's going to happen. So I would personally recommend everybody keep a very close eye on what's going on for the next month.
John Curran: We will try to keep you updated, obviously. The good news is that to the extent that you're in this region, most of the governments are well engaged. But it's a big planet with a lot of governments. Wow, that little tiny report. Any other questions? Okay. Next up is Leslie Nobile to give the Registration Services Report. Thank you.
Leslie Nobile: Good morning, everyone. I'll go briefly through this. This is the Registration Services Update. I'll tell you a little bit about what we've been doing in RSD. This is the RSD team. These are the eight people who work very hard for you all to help you grow your businesses by issuing you number resources, updating your records, and answering your questions. And they really do a great job.
Our current focus. Mark talked a lot about ARIN Online. Registration Services is heavily involved in working on requirements, finding bugs, discovering process enhancements that we need, because most of the work in ARIN Online at this point has been in the registry area. So we're very busy with that. As far as IPv4 depletion, IPv6 uptake, we're trying to keep up. We're trying to make sure we are doing everything we can to make sure our processes work and our systems work.
So we're developing and adapting and improving on our processes and procedures on pretty much a daily basis. We work pretty heavily in the resource revocation and reclamation area, working closely with the financial services department. And I have a slide on that later. And we're really busy implementing new policies and new services that ARIN is offering. So these are some of the things we're focusing on at the moment.
Recovered resources. So I looked back to January of 2005 through August 31st, and we have sort of three different categories of reclaimed recovered services. We get a lot of space returned still to this day voluntarily by organizations that comes through the transfer process or just through everyday sort of interactions with people where they say: We have some extra; take it back; we're not using it. So in the return category, in the past five and a half years we've gotten 441.61 /16 equivalents back and we've gotten 1398 ASNs. In the revoked category, which is the space that we take back due to non-payment, that's where we work closely with FSD, we've gotten 108.26 /16s back and 4,600 2-byte ASNs back. In the reclaimed area, this is the space where we actually actively go after people's resources for fraud, misappropriation, or business dissolution. When we find out that a business is absolutely gone and there's no apparent successor, we will remove the space from the database. We've gotten 2.67 /16 equivalents back, reclaimed that much, and 11 Autonomous System numbers.
Just briefly to mention, all the space that we get back -- I've said this before, a hundred times -- but all the space that we do take back we put in on sort of a hold status for a year so that it clears filters. And before we actually reissue it, we will check blacklists, et cetera, to make sure that the space looks fairly clean before we'll reissue it.
Legacy RSA status. We get people actively coming in on a daily basis for Legacy RSAs. We've had 950 requests to date. 487 have been signed. 151 have been proved -- approved, but they're still not signed yet. Sometimes it takes months to get the right person to sign the contract. So they're approved and we expect them to come in signed at some point. 104 are pending; we're still working with the registrant to do the vetting and verification and going back and forth with questions. 42 were completely abandoned. They just went away. And 166 weren't required. They were basically people that weren't the actual registrants or they were reassignments or just sort of this miscellaneous category. The total number of resources in organizations covered under Legacy RSA at this point is at the bottom of this slide. We've got 188 ASNs covered; 1,292 IPv4 blocks totaling 6.61 /8 equivalents; and 487 different ORG IDs.
So we're looking at v4 depletion, v6 uptake. I have some more slides. I've shown most of these before, but I wanted to update them because it's pretty relevant at this point in time. ARIN administers 73 Legacy /8s. In other words, if you look at the IANA registry, we run the DNS for 73 Legacy /8s. In those legacy /8s, 4.74 percent of the space is actually free. It's holes. .03 percent is held by ARIN to be issued at some date. We've held this indefinitely, actually. And 95.23 percent of that space is already issued. ARIN has 33 non-Legacy /8s; in other words, 33 /8s issued to us by the IANA that we've worked from over the years. And we currently have 7.76 percent of that free.
.65 percent of that is reserved. We do hold reserves on occasion for very large ISPs for one year before we release them back into the pool. .26 percent is held to be reissued. That's in our hold bucket. Something we may have reclaimed or revoked. It's just waiting to clear the blacklists. And 91.34 percent of it has been issued. So in our inventory currently we're right around two /8s open.
So looking at v4 requests over the years. It went back to 2008. We were wondering are we going to see a huge influx of v4 requests going forward as we get closer to depletion. We're just not seeing it. You can see this slide it's pretty flat. As far as what we're issuing, it's just all over the place. And look at August. Wow. We really literally issued nothing. As I said, the largest ISPs haven't been coming in for the large blocks. So that's indicative for this slide.
Looking at v6, it's a different story, though. The requests have been coming in quite steadily. Already we've gotten more requests this year than we did -- in the first seven months of this year than we did last year. So we're over 400 at this point. And this is the confusing slide. So the trend line is the number of allocations we've been making. And the little numbers are the number -- total number of /32s, because we're issuing sometimes larger than /32s. So this year we -- for example, the blue dot shows that we've issued, I guess, almost 250 allocations, but 371 /32s in total. We sort of have an anomaly in 2008 where you see 14,488 /32s. It's because we made several very large IPv6 allocations. This is for IPv6 assignments. Again, we're pretty steady on issuing assignments, and although we've made, what, 140 assignments this year, we've issued -- we've assigned over 1900 individual /48s. So we're making larger than 48 assignments to end users.
So someone had asked how many of your IPv4 ISP subscribers actually hold IPv6 allocations. So there's 3,571 v4 subscribers today, and about 75 percent of them actually don't have v6. 2,661 are IPv4-only and 910 have both IPv4 and IPv6 allocations at this point. And that's all I have.
John Curran: Open for questions.
Wesley George: Wes George with Sprint. I'm wondering if you could go back one slide. Do you have a sense for how many of those IPv4-only versus IPv4 and IPv6 have made requests in the last, say, year or two years for new IPv4 space?
Leslie Nobile: No, I don't know for sure. No, I don't.
Wesley George: I'm thinking that might be useful data to have because it would give you an indicator. Because this is good information to know, just sort of overall state of deployment. But you have a lot of folks out there that have all the IP space they need and therefore they don't necessarily have the same incentive to deploy IPv6, because they're not necessarily burning through addresses. And so that would help to illuminate what the actual split is in terms of how many people are really dragging their feet versus it's not as critical an issue for them.
Leslie Nobile: Right.
John Curran: Can I ask a question about that? So I've run a couple of ISPs. I'm imagining if I ran an ISP that had a little bit of IPv4 reserves, because we just didn't grow as fast as we thought, but you didn't deploy IPv6 because you didn't think you needed to, is that sort of saying to your customers: If you want v6, you're more than welcome to go to a competitor?
Wesley George: Yes. I am not making a value judgment on that line of logic; I'm simply saying that it exists.
John Curran: And we should actually wake up those people as opposed to --
Wesley George: Yes.
Leslie Nobile: Middle mic.
Mike Moorefield: Mike Moorefield with IBM. Your subscriber numbers there, are those including some of the Legacy holders, or is it just the allocations to the ISPs that are your counting in subscribers?
Leslie Nobile: The subscribers are actually ARIN members that we have contracts with that ARIN has issued. So, no, Legacy holders are not included in that number.
Mike Moorefield: That would have distorted it.
Leslie Nobile: Skewed it a little bit.
Andrew Koch: Andy Koch, TDS Telecom. You mentioned that you put addresses on hold for one year before reassigning them or reallocating them. Does that change as we're starting -- or will be running low on a space? Plus you also mentioned that there was also space that you provide for large ISPs to come back and -- you said you reserve it, reserve space?
Leslie Nobile: Right. Yes. So I understand both questions, and the answer to both questions, actually, is ARIN will stop doing reservations. We're committing to stop doing reservations as depletion goes forward. We're going to have to stop doing that soon. We have to make all space available. And as far as holding the space that's not really claimed space, we're going to have to do the same thing. There's a point in time -- I'm not sure what the point is; we haven't really strategized -- but we'll have to stop holding that space and put it back out there. And someone's going to have to clean it, and it probably can't be us. So John.
John Curran: So we've actually begun dialogues with the other RIRs to say regarding your reserve practice, obviously we're going to be discontinuing. And we're expecting them to do the same, but we don't know. We're just keeping them informed. And with respect to the practice of holding in returned space, while we did send out an advisory about this, we did change our practice to six months is now the minimum, the hold-down. Obviously some hold-down is necessary. If an organization doesn't pay its bill or for some reason ends up returning space or has it revoked, you don't want to turn around and reissue it four days later. So while we're going to try to cut down on that, we'll send consultations out so people know they can comment on that. There's going to have to always be a minimum hold-down because someone who doesn't pay their bill doesn't want to find their address space assigned to someone else just because of a clerical error. We need to have a quieting period.
Leslie Nobile: I'll add to that. John's right. We hold space for six months because of those revocations. And we hold space for a year because -- for the blacklist. The year hold is absolutely going away. And, as John said, we have to sort of negotiate on how long we can hold the hold space as long as someone comes back and pays their bill. I think Jason was next.
Jason Schiller: Jason Schiller, UUNET, Verizon, NRO NC. With regard to the reserve space, you said you're going to discontinue this practice. Does this mean that you will not put new space on reserve and anything that is currently on reserve you will exit out of reserve possibly early?
John Curran: Yes. We're running out of space.
Leslie Nobile: We would have had the same answer, but yeah.
Jason Schiller: With regard to revoked space that you want to hold on to for some short period of time to make sure that the person who had it previously doesn't continue to need it, would it be beneficial for you to call upon the community to start routing that space as soon as you think it's revoked to try and make an issue for the holder of that space so they can recognize there's a problem before it actually goes into service?
John Curran: The existing holder who didn't pay his bill or the new one?
Jason: Neither. I'm saying would it be helpful to get people to pull up that space and start routing it so it creates a problem for the existing holder, so they notice it before you actually give it to someone else and put it into service?
John Curran: I would recommend that if that's what you think, it might be a good idea, you send that to a suggestion for the community so we can make a formal suggestion process. I could see people coming down on both sides of that matter. And as long as it doesn't put ARIN at risk, I'd be willing to do whatever the community says.
Jason: Thank you.
Leslie Nobile: I think Marty was next.
Martin Hannigan: Martin Hannigan, Akamai Technologies. Does dirty space mean dirty and embarrassing? Can you explain what the difference between dirty and embarrassing space is.
Leslie Nobile: Well, I'm not sure what dirty, embarrassing space is, but I --
Martin Hannigan: Dirty and embarrassing space. I guess dirty is space that has been globally filtered and has problems and whatnot, and embarrassing is something -- a term that Geoff used. And I'm trying to clarify if that's a term that all RIRs are using or just APNIC.
Leslie Nobile: Okay. Well, the reserve space is space that ARIN informally will reserve when doing an allocation to a large ISP and we can see clear growth trends and clear growth that may exceed their 12-month projection. They may not be able to get enough space. We'll hold it from a reserve. We've been doing this for years. It's been our practice. It's an informal practice. So that goes into one place and it has a reserve tag. And it's held for 12 months, and at the end of 12 months it goes back into the global pool.
The space we reclaim, we revoke, even space that gets returned to us voluntarily goes into a different type of a hold status that we hold for six months. The revoked space, people who haven't paid their bills, there's a six-month limit. We keep it in this bin for them, and if they pay within that six-month time frame, we'll be willing to issue that same space to them, because it makes good sense. But it's all held for one year, again, to -- just the bad space, the dirty space -- to clear filters before we reissue it to a new customer. And before we do that we will be checking. We have a really cool tool that checks about 110 blacklists. And then we reissue. Does that answer?
Martin Hannigan: Is there any algorithm how that gets back into the free pool, the ARIN free pool and gets allocated to members? Is there some separate consideration? Does dirty space get directed anywhere? Does it just get --
Leslie Nobile: No. It just gets added right back into the global pool with everything else. And as it comes up, it gets issued. There's no serious algorithm.
Martin Hannigan: Thanks.
Leslie Nobile: Front mic.
Mike Moorefield: This is complementing those last two questions. Mike Moorefield with IBM again. Complementing these other two questions, when you revoke address space, are you taking some -- this is probably more of a NANOG thing -- are you taking action to ensure that it is not routed, it's not continuing to be routed by possibly some potentially bad actors?
John Curran: So returned, revoked, reclaimed. If someone returned space to us, they voluntarily returned it, we don't check the routing because it's getting returned. Revoked for non-payment. Okay. We don't control the routing table --
Mike: That's what I was asking.
John Curran: -- so we revoke it. We publish it that. You can actually see it in the daily report. It drops from Whois. It's revoked. But at the end of the day an ISP could still be serving that entity. There's not -- we stay far away from that. And same on reclaimed. If we say there's fraud going on and we do a reclamation where we're cleaning the block, but other than the ISPs monitoring to see what happens in the daily files or the Whois, you wouldn't necessarily see that.
Leslie Nobile: Could I add to that, John? I'm sorry. We actually have an RSS feed you can subscribe to that shows you all the space that we issue daily and all the space that gets returned. So people who are actually looking for that, researchers, spam guys, they download that and they can check against what's getting returned. So that's actually a good service. Additionally -- one other thing. I apologize. Before we issue the space, we check it. When we issue it and we find out there may be issues or if somebody's routing something and they shouldn't be, we do send messages saying this space is actually not registered to that person. We do try to help in that respect.
John Curran: I'm closing the microphones for further comments on the Registration Services Report. Get in queue. Right after that we'll go into the lunch break. Break, break. I'm sorry. The refreshment break. It's actually the packing and get out of your hotel room break. So lines are closing, closing, closed.
Leslie Nobile: Andrew is next.
Andrew Dul: Andrew Dul, Cascadeo. Are you going to be announcing your change when you are no longer going to be reserving people's blocks so that they could plan accordingly if they wanted to say, hey, I would like my reserve block that I've been holding for the past six months?
John Curran: They've never had a reserve block, let us be clear. ARIN's practice is, in order to give contiguous blocks wherever possible -- is to not assign from space adjacent to a recent assignment and to use that space to continue the current assignment that's been given. But that's in ARIN's practice trying to respect the community's routing table. At no time was anyone allocated or assigned that block. So the answer is we're no longer even paying attention to that, and the ones that are there are effectively gone.
Mike Moorefield: So as of today there are --
John Curran: There's no assurance that the block that --
Mike Moorefield: Well, there was never any assurance that the block was there.
John Curran: Right. The same no assurance applies today, yes.
Mike Moorefield: But now it's been officially unremoved from and back more into the free pool as opposed to being internally marked for perhaps being reserved by previous policy?
John Curran: The thin ice you are on is potentially thinner today and it is sunny.
Leslie Nobile: Owen.
Owen DeLong: I would like to propose throwing a stake in the ground. Owen DeLong, ARIN AC. I would like to propose throwing a stake in the ground for the 30-day mark as we go forward and get closer to depletion on reclaimed or revoked space. I don't think that holding reserves for six months while the community is starving makes a lot of sense.
Leslie Nobile: Andrea.
Andrea Cima: Hello. Andrea Cima, Registration Services, RIPE NCC. I just wanted to add that we have a similar practice as ARIN with regard to reservations, and we have stopped doing this early this year. So we can see that work in line with regards to these processes.
Leslie Nobile: Tom.
Tom Zeller: Remote user Joe Maimon of CHL asks: returned/revoked ASNs seems to be quite similar to the total 2-byte ASN IANA still has free. What is the reissue process for those ASNs?
Leslie Nobile: What is the reissue process? They're held for six months and then they're put back into our global pool for reassignment to customers. Same practice as with the v4 space.
John Curran: Note that that list of resources covers 2005 to the present. Many of those resources were held for six months and did come current and were reissued.
Leslie Nobile: Lots of reissues. Okay.
John Curran: Okay. Thank you very much.
John Curran: I believe we now go to break. Please come back here promptly at 11:00 a.m. so we can finish both of the remaining department reports and the Advisory Council and the Board of Trustees report. Thank you.
John Curran: If everyone would take their seats, we're going to be starting in about 30 seconds. We have one hour to do six reports and an open mic session. I will tell you there's a meeting of some of us at noon immediately at the end of this, so we're going into the speed round of the ARIN Members Meeting. I call up Mary K. for the Human Resources and Administration Report.
Mary K. Lee: Good morning, everyone. Update on Human Resources. A bit of what we've been up to. A little talk about benefits inside ARIN and, of course, just in general what's going on with ARIN staff.
Back at the office as always during meeting week we have Therese Colosi and Jessica Heideman doing everything they can to support us while we're here, all the little visible and many invisible things. For instance, Louis Lee pointed out about travel arrangements. They're doing anything from changing light bulbs to making sure that your visa is correct for your next trip overseas, facility, minute taking, and shipping things to meetings. All sorts of items like that.
Six-month reviews. ARIN has a review cycle with two reviews. We do a full formal review, so to speak, in December. But midway through the year we do a six-month review. That's a chance for us to look at our individual people's objectives and goals, matching up with the company's strategic plan. Sometimes someone has achieved their goals and we need to set up new ones. Sometimes the company slightly changed direction. So we want to make sure that people are aligned individually with the overall company goals.
And succession planning. We've put together a small but pretty concise succession plan. It's for everyone on the management team and many of the senior and key positions inside the company. And what we've done is just identified on an interim basis, short-term basis -- say, for instance, someone goes out on a leave of absence or illness or something happens -- that we know immediately who is stepping into that person's place. And then in the long term would we be looking at an internal or external replacement for that person if it turned out to be a permanent vacancy.
We did, in August, a benefit survey for the staff. We asked questions about all our benefits, kind of soup to nuts. A little bit of everything. Some detailed questions about the medical insurance and some other items. Found that in general people are very satisfied with our benefits. But, of course, it's always good to know how things look and what's important to people, what they need to have. I was -- you'll appreciate this -- the two most popular items that we offer are the computer loan program and casual dress. Those were the two that elicited the most comments. So I did like that.
Every fall we review our current coverage. We work with a benefits broker and go out and do a full study that compares our coverage to other coverage on the market. We have some limitations, because of our company's size. Some programs are not available to us because of size, but we do take a good look. And this year, because of some comments on the benefits survey, we'll be doing an even more rigorous audit of what our coverage is. The other thing I'm trying to keep an eye on is the Health Reform Act. In the event you've not seen it in the news, it did start to take effect in September. But for us so far the changes have been very small because the things that had to be enacted are actually in ARIN's coverage already. So we have not had any changes yet.
ARIN staffing. We have 52 full-time employees. No vacancies and we are full. The building's full, as you heard from Mark, and saw we have a number of contractors working with us as well. Sort of an interesting stat to me is all along in ARIN's history we've been roughly 50/50 men and women. That's really shifted over the last year. Of the full-time employees we now have 30 men and 22 women. It's the first time I've seen that number kind of slide.
Training and education. We've had a lot going on in that area. We had two members of the Engineering team both completed their Bachelor's degree earlier this year and a member of the Communications and Member Services Department working on their Master's program. And many other seminars and things. Some of the classes people have taken this year, Adobe Flash I and II, Excel, Critical Thinking, HTML, CSS, and probably a few others that I'm not aware of.
A few other things we've been doing. We did join the Global Corporate Challenge again this year. Bob was one of the team captains. Who was the other team captain? Jessica Heideman, back at the office. We had two teams of seven each on that participated. We didn't win any awards but we did all walk a lot, so good. We're getting a bit greener at ARIN. Maybe not as much as some, but we're participating in a few things. We now recycle all cardboard that comes into the building. We took away the paper coffee cups for people and we're forcing them to actually use ceramic coffee mugs in the office. Carbon offsets, Bob does this for us in the Financial Services Department. We do at the end of the year purchase carbon offsets for the travel around the world.
I wanted to congratulate a few people for the anniversaries and someone who is no longer with us. But this is the first time that a long-time employee of ARIN left, Cathy Murphy, our staff attorney, with us for over 11 years, left a couple months ago moved on to a new part of her life. I want to congratulate her and thank her for her many years with us.
Mary K. Lee: And this year was a busy year for ten year anniversaries. We had five of them. Two of them are not here, but three of them are. That would be Susan Hamlin, Leslie Nobile and Tammy Rowe; the two not here are Darren Kara and Tim Christensen. So thank you all very much.
John Curran: Any questions? No. Thank you.
Okay. Next up we have Susan Hamlin coming up to give the Communications and Member Services Report.
Susan Hamlin: Good morning, everyone. Communication is usually done most effectively slowly, but at John's persuasion I will run through this fairly quickly.
I want to talk a little bit about things we've been working on in addition to the planning and executing of this meeting and even looking ahead now to Puerto Rico. So since Toronto we have added the name Communications and Member Services. We have been talking internally about this for quite a while. And two reasons, really. It better reflects the work of the department. You'll see here divided on this slide five folks who are really focused on all types of communication activities from the website to creating documentation, public affairs, communications, and graphic design. Then we have three folks who are also communicators. They collaborate with everybody in the department, but they're focused a little more on specific member services, which would be Einar in the policy development process; De, our meeting planner, and Jud, membership coordinator who deals with elections, membership database, that sort of thing.
The other reason for the name change is from an external perspective we have a lot of folks in outreach communication, but we really didn't have a single focal point for someone who wasn't familiar with all of our activities. So adding communications, we now have a single location. We work together with Cathy Handley and Richard Jimmerson in developing our strategic communication plan and developing key messages for the organization. As Chris Morrow mentioned yesterday, we were talking about the letters to CEOs. There are different ways to communicate the same message to different audiences. So in the Communication and Member Services Department, we work with everybody to develop the key messages and then we work to ensure that everyone going to different audiences is using the same bottom line message.
Our current member statistics. You'll see there we have 3696 general members. The majority of these are in the US, Canada. The proportional representation hasn't changed much over the years. And we average about 35 new members a month. Jud covered a lot of the changes to the election process. In Dearborn, if you were with us last fall or watching remotely, there was a lot of discussion about election processes, about nomination committee, and the board took all of that under advisement and made some changes to improve the process. These all were adopted in December and put in place for this year's election. I'll be happy to answer any questions if anybody has any about this. But the two things I did want to mention about election is that, yes, this year we sent certified letters to all the eligible DMRs and most of you all, if you're one, should have one waiting for you when you get back to your office. The other thing is we will be conducting calling next week. ARIN staff will be calling every eligible voter to encourage them to vote to answer any questions. If you've already voted, thanks so much. We probably will call you anyway because it's difficult for us to keep up and actually know who has voted on a daily basis.
ARIN on the Road is a new activity this year. We picked a couple of locations where we don't usually travel for an ARIN meeting or it's not a city where ARIN has been represented at an industry trade show. So we picked Raleigh, Durham, and Phoenix. We put together a program, a half day program -- 10:00 in the morning to 3:00 in the afternoon -- and we sent three ARIN staff: Richard Jimmerson, Einar Bohlin and John Worley, from the Registration Services department. It was a great opportunity for one-on-one face time with members who haven't made it to an ARIN meeting. And I'd like to give a special shout out to Jason and Jack who attended the Raleigh meeting. Subsequently registered as remote participants and are starting to get more involved with ARIN. We think this is a successful program, and we're looking to plan a few more of these next year.
New features. We strive to provide the type of information that's useful to you all, not only education, yourself, but also documentation that you might want to take out when you're speaking to other groups or share with other folks. So these are a few new technical sheets and a new IPv6 brochure that you'll find on the website. They're all PDFs. You're free to download, print them. If you're going to speak to an organization or even internally in your office and you want copies, just let us know and we'll send you whatever quantity you need. We also are interested in your suggestions of other types of materials that would be useful to you. So if you have any thoughts on that, feel free to drop us a line at email@example.com.
Coming soon. The graphic on the left is a screen shot. We're putting together a Flash presentation based largely on the community slide deck we have now, IPv4/IPv6. That slide deck is available for you to take and use in presentations. And we thought giving you an additional tool, a Flash presentation that's narrated, it's an easy thing you can pop in and play anywhere. So expect that to be out sometime before the end of the year.
And it's never too early to remind folks about the fellowship program. The next application period is in January for our Puerto Rico meeting. You all attend. But as you're going out in your community, if you know of other people who you think would be interested or you would like to have them experience an ARIN meeting, please ask them to apply. Participation, as you've heard a lot this morning, is key for a lot of reasons. We are always looking for ways to make it easier for you to solicit your input. But these are a few things that we would ask everybody to continue to do and to spread the word to people. I'm sort of preaching to the wrong audience here, but as you go back to your communities, if you would continue to encourage people to get involved.
Upcoming meetings. Happy to report next April we're going back to San Juan. AT&T is our network sponsor there. And next fall we will be in Philadelphia. We have network sponsors for both of these meetings, but there are lots of sponsorships available. This meeting we tried an additional social. If you enjoyed that, had fun, interested in sponsoring one of those at another meeting, let us know. That's it.
John Curran: Thank you. Any questions for Susan? No. Thank you.
John Curran: Next up we have the Financial Services Report with Bob Stratton. I will note that it's Chief Financial Officer Bob Stratton. Bob moved from controller to CFO earlier this year.
Bob Stratton: Where is my hat? I thought I got a hat. I'm chief bean counter. Very good.
Okay. I'm going to give you an overview of Financial Services department. Go over the staff, what we're up to in operations, how we're supporting the FinCom in terms of staff. Tammy is here. Ten years. Amaris, Tanya, Amy, and Maria back at the office. Hopefully you had a chance to meet Val Winkelman at the front desk. She's our staff accountant, keeps the books up to date. Michael Abejuela, our new staff attorney has been here all of three weeks.
Operations. Invoicing over the past 12 months. Sent out a total of about 16,500 invoices, about 9,500 checks were received, 7,300 credit card payments. The checks are a larger dollar amount per transaction; the credit cards are usually paid for the maintenance fees, the $100 payments. In terms of the operations, the credit cards we receive, we actually send you to another -- we send you to our credit card vendor. So we do not take the credit card numbers on our website for security purposes. The checks actually go to a lockbox. In terms of the operations, Michael is in place. Steve Ryan is still our corporate counsel. I believe his title is attack dog. But that's just --
Bob Stratton: Anyway, Michael's going to do the internal part of the legal advice that we need. So he's going to work on subpoena responses, working with the Registration Services agreements, helping to make sure that our operations are meeting the requirements, risk mitigation, that type of thing. In terms of accounting and finance, in terms of the risk management, we review our insurance contracts every year, two new ones in the last couple of years. Scott mentioned the event cancellation. If for some reason this event was cancelled, we have insurance to cover the costs that would be associated with it.
Another policy that we implemented was increasing the health insurance for our travelers. We do overseas travel and domestic travel. So if somebody got sick while they were on travel for us, we have coverage.
Our fiscal controls are in place. What that means is if we need to pay a bill, we first go to the COO, if it's a certain amount. If it's over a certain amount, we go to the CEO. And if it's an amount above that, we need the CEO and the treasurer. We have an audit trail for all of that. I won't say that we're perfect, but we do a pretty good job. And again I want to compliment Val who is actually doing the job. In terms of our audit, Scott had mentioned it's a clean audit. That's about all I want to say about that.
We upgraded our accounting software in July. One of the questions earlier was when is the billing going to go into ARIN Online. This was predicated on actually upgrading the software. So we got that done. There were some hiccups. I don't think that you can upgrade software without hiccups. But it was de minimis, as they would say.
In supporting the FinCom, we're developing budgets, as John mentioned. It's a challenging time. We also modeled some future projections. There's some event coming that I think people have been talking about that may have an effect on revenues - something about v4. What effect that would have on us. Well, we're projecting, but, again, that's an unknown factor. In terms of liaison, we're the financial providers for the FinCom. We have a relationship with the bank, with our investment advisors, with the auditors.
An interesting aside on the investment advisors is they've been giving us advice on how to maybe mitigate the volatility. The stock market seems to be dynamic. 2008 was a dynamic southward journey and 2009 was a dynamic northward journey. So far this year seems to have been a dynamic journey every month. But, anyway, we're fairly conservative in the structure of the accounts. Better than 50 percent of them are in nonequity holdings. We still experience volatility, but we think that's a fairly rational way to address the volatility.
And Scott had mentioned on the auditors, we have the RFP out. And we're talking with the references as we speak.
This last slide is just something I find interesting. Interest rates are historically low. I think the Journal just had a piece that mortgage rates are about four and a quarter, which is historically low. But that doesn't mean they'll stay that way. If you look at this graph of the prime rate history, early '80s reached 20 percent. I seem to remember those days. And there was inflation associated with that as well. Who knows what the future holds, but you can see that I'm not sure interest rates have much further to fall unless they go below zero, but hopefully not. Anyway, with that, it's good to see everybody. Thank you.
John Curran: Any questions for Bob? No?
John Curran: Next up I'd like Megan Kruse to come up to give the Outreach Report.
Megan Kruse: I'll talk about Outreach and Public Relations since it came up in the open mic yesterday. It's a little expanded from what it says on the agenda. So a lot of these first slides you've seen pretty much every time we've done an Outreach update. Why we do this is basically to talk to everyone who will listen and then keep talking to those that aren't yet. We want to raise awareness of what we're doing, why it's important, why you need to get involved, educate people on what is happening in the community.
These are our major key messages. I don't know if you've heard, but we're running out of IPv4 addresses so we're trying to spread the word about that a little bit. So perhaps you can help. Also talking about things like the Legacy RSA, 4-byte ASNs, RPKI, things like that.
Audiences. This list basically can be boiled down to all of the above. Everyone. Talking a lot to the technical community, network operators but also elevating that to CIO types, CEO types, governments and the media and the press. We do a lot of presentations, exhibits, media interviews. We're doing more and more contributed articles and experience reports of how we implement IPv6 internally at ARIN as kind of a case study, sort of things like that. And also we go and lurk in hallways and stop people and preach to them.
Susan's already gone over some of our newer materials. We've got a whole -- we've got a ton of one-page fact sheets. All the swag out there that disappears in about five minutes when we put it out. Comic books. We're still giving away the same three comic books. We're not doing any new ones. We've got a community-use slide deck so that any of you can go download that off our website and go give it to a room of people of your choice. If we can't be there in person, you can do it yourself.
This is really tiny font, but it's the only way it would fit on one slide. On the left is everything we've done since our last meeting in April, and on the right is where we're going to be until the end of the year. So we're busy. I don't know how many events that is, but it's a lot. And the list kind of keeps growing. We're going to kind of cut back a little bit on the trade shows and the booth spaces going into 2011, but there will still be some and we'll still be on the road doing more speaking engagements and we're still going to be out there. It's not slowing down a whole lot.
John's already talked about this, but we had -- on September 28th there was the NTIA workshop. This is kind of starting to go into the PR side of this presentation. But these were the major announcements from the US government of this is what you need to do if you're going to continue to do business with the government. So I think John's already mostly covered that. So you can read it if you want, but you've already heard it.
Going into the PR side of things, that NTIA workshop got a lot of press coverage. There were probably 50 articles that came out. And we've done a good job of reaching out to the trade press, but now we're starting to get the political press. When the US government does something, a whole new breed of reporter kind of latches on to the story. So it's getting bigger and bigger. The PR side is really starting to snowball. We've been working with a PR firm since last July and they're helping us out with the pitching to the media and also the higher level, the strategy and the planning and tactics and that sort of thing. This is some of the media coverage. January is when we hit -- the IANA pool dipped below 10 percent. So that was a lot of coverage. July and September we had more press releases going out the wire. So our coverage spikes when we do that. We're doing more and more press releases as time goes on, just getting things out.
John Curran: Go back to that slide. This is the count per month of articles that have ARIN references or ARIN quotes in them in the press.
Megan Kruse: Right. This is not including NRO coverage. The 10 percent press release was an NRO press release. Sometimes ARIN is mentioned depending on the publication, sometimes it's just NRO news. If I had an NRO media coverage graph, that would be much, much bigger. This is ARIN-specific coverage. These are some of the publications that we've hit. We have really good relationships with a lot of the trade press. Like I said, it's starting to expand a bit into mainstream press and also some vertical markets like gaming. The gaming magazines are really starting to latch on and have more articles and ask questions and that sort of thing. Since this is Atlanta and I've been stalking CNN reporters, we did at one point hit the front page of CNN.com. So I was super stoked about that. And John was even quoted in the article. So that makes me happy.
Recent press releases. This goes back to that graph where things spike. One of the things we heard yesterday in the open mic, maybe this should be a media event. Maybe we should be talking to the press. We are. We did a press release when we hit 10 percent. We did a press release at 6.25 percent. We're at 5.46 percent now. We are getting those numbers out and they are being published regularly. These were kind of the three big ones that we've done this year. And then coming up we've got more numbers to throw out. We're about to hit 5 percent. That's going to be another big NRO media push, and obviously there's an ARIN component to that. So you'll see John's face all over the place. Even more so than you do now.
We'll do another press release when the last five /8s go out the door. That will be not too long from now. Soon. And then we'll do another one when we start saying no to people. So there's a lot -- there's a lot of activity going on. We're going to do more and more press releases. You're going to see more and more coverage. You're going to start seeing this in mainstream publications. Your grandma is going to be calling you saying: Did you know about this? Don't you do something with computers? So it's happening.
We're also going along with the traditional media. We're also doing a lot more in social media, talking a lot about where we're going to be, where we're going to be speaking. Swing by the booth. You need resources, we can help you. We've got a resource analyst, that sort of thing. It's a way to kind of branch out of this room, getting more and more people involved and having conversations with people, how can we help you. We are a service organization. We are here to make your life easier. Let us know what we can do.
And this is how to get involved. I brought my little notebook up here. We've got Facebook, Twitter. LinkedIn is new. We just opened that one in September. And YouTube. YouTube really just has our Flash presentations on it, our multimedia stuff. We are really growing in Twitter and Facebook in particular. And this is as of September. And I've got notes here. Twitter we're up to 860 followers. And then Facebook, right now we're up to 800. I really want to break a thousand in each one by the end of the year. If you're not all Facebook fans and Twitter followers, I expect you to be within the next ten minutes. Please go. LinkedIn is new. Like I said, we only opened it in September, but we're up to 111 group members there. So we are actively pushing these. If there's anything that you'd like to see, if there's any discussions you want to start, let us know.
We also started a microsite. We've got a blog. If there's anything you want us to cover that -- on our regular website, ARIN.net, there's no place for kind of the dynamic content, and that's what this is. It's where we're going to be speaking, education, all of our fact sheets and that sort of thing, how you can get involved. There's links to that community use slide deck so you can go out and give a presentation on your own. And all of the bells and whistles to go along with social media, tweet this, that sort of thing. The Team ARIN feed. All that is on there. If there's anything you want to see, let me know. This is fairly new and we're still rolling it out and we're still adding new features, so keep checking back teamarin.net. That's all I've got. Happy to answer any questions.
Lee Howard: Lee Howard likes this.
(Laughter and applause. )
David Williamson: David Williamson, Microsoft, Tellme. You have that huge laundry list of events and conferences you're going to. Great. Looks like more and more of those are not networking groups, which is awesome. Please continue. Thank you.
John Curran: Wait. Come back to the mic. Okay. So all of you are members of organizations that I don't know. Now, this could be a rotary club, a knitting circle, it could be anything. I'm not even going to speculate because it gets pretty bizarre pretty fast. And the fact of the matter is that the only people affected by this changeover of us running out of v4 addresses and moving to v6 is everyone who uses the Internet, which pretty much means everyone at every club you're at. To the extent that you want to tell these people about what's going on, we can help. We have slide decks. We can orient them towards grandmas in a circle knitting, we can orient them towards hobbyists, we can orient them towards a group of small business owners. But we need you to also do these speaking engagements in the groups you're presently in. To the extent you're out meeting with other people, we want to help you in the presentations I know you're going to give on this topic. Thank you.
Megan Kruse: One other thing I wanted to add is technically the Outreach department is Richard and I. It's very small. We have a lot of help from the entire Member Services Department. Obviously from John. He gets out every once in a while. And I also really want to thank the Board and Advisory Council, because they've been coming with us to events. They've been speaking. I see Bill Sandiford is up to the mic. He's calling me about every two weeks saying: Oh, my God, I'm speaking; can you send me some hats? We really appreciate it and we're happy to help. Keep those requests coming.
David Williamson: To be clear, I've also entirely stolen your slides and used them in multiple forums. So thank you.
David Farmer: I agree with Lee. I like it. Dave Farmer, University of Minnesota, ARIN AC.
So in tradition of PPML plus one, and then I just want to note on Team ARIN, everybody, there's a calendar feed that's really cool. You can have it in your calendar, your calendar tells you when you're supposed to come to these meetings, and a whole bunch of the other things they're doing. When you go look at that calendar, it's like, oh, my God, these people are busy.
Megan Kruse: We're also archiving all the presentations we give, so we have a historical record of what we've been doing. You can see we did this event in April and this is where the v4 pool was at that point. So it kind of gives you a little bit of a history lesson if you were to dig through. Bill.
Bill Sandiford: So not to beat a dead horse -- Bill Sandiford, Telnet Communications and the AC.
I just wanted to say I encourage people to do what Megan and John have just been talking about. This year I've done about four or five events on my own. And the support that ARIN will give you to do this is second to none. They have the community slide deck. You know, I called them up last week at an event that I wasn't expecting to speak at and I said: I need stuff like now. And the next morning there's a FedEx box at the hotel with all the information that I needed to support me and speak to the community and other organizations. So take advantage of the services and what they're willing to do for you. It really works well, and there are still a lot of people out there that don't understand the magnitude of what's going on.
John Curran: I have one request. One of the things that we've been beginning to get more and more requests for is: I got the message, we're running out; I want to know how to -- and this is the technical question -- how do I change my small business, how do I move my network as an ISP, how do I offer v6 services, how do I -- we're beginning to accumulate a long list of "how do I do v6" questions. Now, Matt is -- I don't know if Matt's here somewhere. So ARIN does a lot of stuff, and I can keep pointing to how ARIN did it, and, in fact, we've actually begun to do the how to convert your internal network to v6 and how to convert your website. But the reality is that this shouldn't just be ARIN saying how we got it done. We need people who are willing to speak about real world use cases, okay, to contact myself or Megan and say "I'm available. " Because increasingly now they're not just interested in hearing about depletion; they actually want to hear about someone who has been in a hosting company or someone who has been in a small business and has done their migration to turning on v6. But we also need speakers. We literally need people willing to go fly out somewhere. Including Owen who has done a bunch for us.
Owen DeLong: Owen DeLong, Hurricane Electric. I'm available.
John Curran: The rest of you, some of you want to talk about your v6 success, come find myself or Megan.
Megan Kruse: Thank you.
John Curran: Thank you, Megan.
John Curran: Okay. And now we're done with the department reports. We're going to move directly into the ARIN Advisory Council Report. John Sweeting, Chair of the ARIN AC.
John Sweeting: All right. Good morning, everyone. Here to give you the Advisory Council Report since the last time we met in Toronto. The Advisory Council is made up 15 elected members with three-year terms, each staggered five year -- five people a year. I want to do again a special thank you to Marla Azinger, who is not running again, for her six years as past chair.
John Sweeting: For the election this year. So, again, it's the AC members serve three-year terms, five members up for re-election each year. Terms ending December 31st this year: Cathy, Marla, Owen, Scott, and Tom. And there are 13 nominated individuals for the five positions. So please get out and vote.
This is the slide we go through every meeting. The AC role in the PDP is to evaluate proposals, develop draft policy, present the draft policy at these meetings, determine the draft policy meets community needs and requirements and recommend draft policy which meets those requirements to the Board of Trustees for adoption.
Let's see the year in review. We had 16 new proposals come in of which ten were abandoned. Of those ten five were petitioned: two of the petitions were unsuccessful and three were successful. And we moved the other six proposals to draft policy status. The draft policies. We looked at 14 draft policies: six from AC, three from petitions, and there were five carried over. The status of those 14 draft policies: four recommended for adoption; three were abandoned, of which one was a petitioned proposal; and there's currently seven working, of which two of those are petitioned proposals.
Meetings. This is the Advisory Council. Also one of our voluntary jobs is to participate in other RIR meetings and to -- also at the NANOG meetings and gather the information, present a report back to the AC and to the ARIN staff. These are the list of the meetings that we attended this year. Of special interest is, following Megan's report, we participated in 23 outreach events. That was the entire AC, different members of the AC each time. And it was a significant chunk of time put out there and effort. We also participate in the fellowship program. We have one person that participates on the selection committee and then three AC members provide mentorship to the selected fellows during the meetings, during each one of the meetings. We participate in the outreach program. We have a member on the nomination committee. We have two members on the PDP committee, and we do just about anything else that Mr. Curran asks us to do, or the Board.
A whole lot of people to thank, but, to keep things short, I'm just going to thank everybody: the community, the AC, the ARIN staff. I'd especially like to thank Therese, because she does a lot of work to keep us on the move.
John Sweeting: And remember to vote.
John Curran: Any questions for John? Okay. A quick reminder. This meeting ends at noon. The wireless network ends when this meeting ends. It's going to be very prompt and very sudden. Get all your desirable bits out of it now, okay, because they will be closing down very promptly. Okay. Final report is the Board of Trustees Report by Paul Vixie, followed by the open mic.
Paul Vixie: Hello, everyone. We'll keep this brief. So since we -- since the last meeting, we have approved three policies: 2010-2, 2010-4, 2010-6. They're in numeric order; they were not approved in that order. Of special note, we had no emergency policies, no policies sent back for revision, no policies rejected. There was nothing except approval. Very quiet times.
In our regular business, various Board meetings, we have impaneled a nominations committee. We accepted the auditor report. We approved the launch of an RFP for a new auditor, and we selected a fellowship committee, containing John Osmon and Steve Bertrand.
We made some minimal changes to the bylaws. In the nominations process we made clear the ability to nominate by a petition, and we clarified the role of the NomCom, which I have summarized here as they're to recruit and fill a good slate. I recommend reading the bylaws online to see how we actually wordsmith that. It was just a clarification.
In other business, we have joined ITU as a sector member. That's turned out to be very important given what's going on right now in Guadalajara since we have a seat at some tables that we would not otherwise have had.
We extended the Legacy RSA deadline to December 31st. We have moved the responsibility for generating in-addr.arpa away from ARIN and over to ICANN/IANA. This is something that ARIN has done as sort of the historic artifact of sort of receiving that responsibility from Network Solutions. But given that it has some /8s in it that are not in the ARIN region, everyone felt that this was better to do this in a central location, and that location is IANA. We considered suggestion 2010.1 and concurred with the FinCom's recommendation for more details. I'm sure you can find that on the ARIN website.
For NewNOG, several times today we've mentioned that we have given them a bridge loan, more or less, to help them get started. We also approved the signing of a hotel contract since they are too young an organization to be taken seriously by the large hotels that need to set aside huge blocks of rooms with attendant liability.
NRO incorporation is moving again. This is something that we have been working with the other RIRs about over the years, and sometimes everybody seems like they want to do it, and sometimes some RIR doesn't want to do it for some reason. Right now everybody wants to do it. So we're moving forward with that.
There were some minimal changes to the RSA and LRSA, and this is largely just wordsmithing. We did not change the terms of service, but we did incorporate the version number as a result of these changes.
And that's my presentation.
Cathy Aronson: Cathy Aronson, ARIN AC. As much as you could make sure to communicate the role of the NomCom and what they can do with the slate of candidates just before that happens, because there was a recent NomCom where it was very contentious and controversial. And, anyway, it would just be good now that it's clarified, if when the next NomCom forms, that could get put out for everyone to notice that.
Paul Vixie: Thank you. John has taken that as an action.
Tom Zeller: Tom Zeller, ARIN AC. I'm curious about strategic thinking about a future when organizations don't have to come back for numbers every year. Doesn't that affect revenue dramatically or not? And, if so, how do you see that playing out?
Paul Vixie: So we do have to reinvent ARIN as the post-IPv4 depletion company. And this comes up at every Board retreat and every Board meeting. We know that we need to understand our current costs and know exactly sort of what we spent and on what and where our current revenues come from and to make sure those match up going into the future. And this is a topic of great interest. I don't feel that we're going to be shrinking sort of in the next few years, because depletion is going to make us busier as we do a lot of transfers and whatever else comes out of that. But, rest assured, we are looking for any sort of concrete evidence that the organization needs to shrink, and we will meet that before it happens. We're not going to be caught napping at a -- overbuilt for the next round of responsibilities. But I don't see that happening in the very short term. John, did you have anything to add?
John Curran: I guess the only thing I'll say is that recognize that right now the fees that people pay are for Registration Services, includes the resources you presently hold, not just for the ones you request. So, actually, on day one, even with no issuance, nothing actually changes. Now, the reality is if you're not requesting more resources, then we don't need the expenses of having a team to handle that. But we don't know if you're requesting more resources. We keep seeing IPv6 policies come up that may end up with people requesting more resources.
We also have the IPv4 transfers which are needs based and therefore require someone to come in and justify their need on an application in order to get a transfer. As long as those IPv4 transfers are going on, we're going to have to have to have a registration desk to handle that sort of function. Then there's all the auditing and all the point of contact work. So I actually was telling someone yesterday in the hall, depending on how many policies you folks propose, the next few years could have more work for ARIN every year than less work for ARIN every year, but we're very sensitive to this. The Board has asked us to do some cost-based budgeting and some cost-based calculations so that as work drops we can report to them and we can get budget authorization that matches what actually the work is.
So we've had this come up, as Paul said. We're setting up a framework in place that we're ready to keep ARIN at the right size. Whether that's bigger or smaller, based on whatever you guys adopt for policies and how much work we have to do to implement them.
Paul Vixie: Thank you, John. Any further questions for the Board or about the Board report? Anything on the remote participation? Seeing no other questions, we're done with this part. We're going to move right into the open mic session.
Paul Vixie: So here we're not so much looking for policy suggestions, although that's welcome also, but this is throwing it open to the entirety of ARIN's operation. In fact, it could be argued that the last question was an open mic question. Perfect example. If there's something you want to know, want to say, there's policy, some policy area you'd like to do work in, you'd like to solicit fellow travelers, this is your opportunity. This is your time. Kevin.
Kevin Oberman: Kevin Oberman, ESnet. Several times during this meeting when the letters to CEOs were discussed I heard John say they had sent out registered letters to all the CEOs. Registered mail is intended for the transfer of negotiable securities, cash, and things like that. Why are -- were they really --
John Curran: Certified, I double checked, they're certified. We use the service to generate them, and they have some real expense. But they were not registered because it would have been five times more expensive.
Kevin Oberman: Exactly. Thank you.
Paul Vixie: Yes, sir.
Mustafa Karadeniz:This is Mustafa Karadeniz. My question is in the IPv6 adoptation. I kind of suggest that IPv6 adoptation to be one click away. I mean, as IPv4 registers, I would like to have same number of IPs from IPv6 and I can play with it. I can give it to my customers. But currently I have to apply. I have to pay a fee. I mean, we have two -- I heard that some of the RIRs kind of they have actual free one click away iteration. Why don't we have it?
Paul Vixie: John?
John Curran: So we have policies that for your initial IPv6 allocation do require us to ask some questions like if you're an existing provider, and depending on the size of the allocation, your current infrastructure, and those policies and fees would all need to be streamlined. I know APNIC had an initiative here where they did some streamlining and then implemented that online. Geoff, could you say 30 seconds about what APNIC did here?
Geoff Huston: Yes. About a year ago in Beijing our members said that they wanted v6 to be incredibly easy. They wanted us to facilitate members actually getting v6. We implemented a program that if you already have an IPv4 allocation from us, you can obtain the minimum IPv6 allocation, which in our case is a /32, with one click. Because the fees in APNIC relate to the minimum of IPv4 and IPv6, in essence, getting the IPv6 allocation entailed no additional fees over and above what members were already paying. And the one click basically agreed to the terms and conditions and policies of the APNIC with v6. So, yes, we did a one click. You notice on the report yesterday the number of allocations this year has rocketed upwards probably as a result of that initiative. So, yes, it is one click away in AP.
Paul Vixie: Thank you. Rear microphone.
Chris Grundemann: Chris Grundemann, TW Telecom. We have a problem. We have failed to deploy dual stack in a meaningful way in time to avoid transition problems. Throughout this week and over the last year or two years, longer, there have been lots of discussions about not being able to build policy because we can't predict the future. I propose that we should build policy to build the future instead of trying to predict it. If we form it, then we know the policy is correct. With that in mind, I, along with other members of the community, would like to propose a policy with three objectives: To encourage IPv6 deployment prior to depletion, to enable growth of IPv4 where IPv6 is being deployed, and to improve the utilization of IP addresses.
Our community is a community that can provide leadership here. The way we can do that is with some high-level requirements. ARIN will only make allocations and assignments for networks that have already deployed production IPv6. Any IPv4 addresses received under this policy must be deployed alongside IPv6. This policy will encourage deployment of IPv6 in existing IPv4-only networks. We have some rough policy text put together. I think that this is an emergency and we need to make something happen very quickly. Please find me, Martin Hannigan, Jason Schiller, now or after the meeting or make comments now and let's put something together. Thanks.
Paul Vixie: Thank you, Chris. (Applause. )
Paul Vixie: I want to suggest that you post this also to the PPML.
Steve Ryan: I just want to make sort of a public service announcement. It's wonderful when groups like that form. One of the reasons there's a lawyer in the room here is to make sure that when people are talking, they speak about the needs of the community generally. So when companies meet to propose policies like that, it's very important that people conduct themselves in the following way. You may have a particular need for your company or for the segment of which your company might be. You might be an end user. You might be a large ISP. You might be a small ISP. It's important to talk in the abstract about what sectors need as opposed to your individual companies. So I want people to practice safe practices in their communications with one another, and as they do that -- and I think it's a wonderful thing that people are going to work together, but you just -- you don't have me there to be your Jiminy Cricket. So think about that as you do your communications.
Paul Vixie: Thank you, Counsel. David.
David Williamson: David Williamson, Microsoft, Tellme. Talking about the letters to CEOs and executives, I just had a random thought. I suspect a lot of CEOs get those letters. It's just addressed to them, it just says ARIN at top, and they go, hmm, okay, that's nice. Would it be more interesting if we also added some sort of reference in it to who the DMR for the organization is so they have someone they can talk to internally as well as going and looking up who ARIN is and what they do?
John Curran: In the past letter we sent there was not just a contact. If we do it going forward, we can. The generation of 15,000 letters turns out to be problematic even if the text is identical. Things that would be useful is including the DMR. Things that would also be useful in a follow-up letter would be including the first letter that we sent you a few years ago.
Okay. Both of those make a process that might be a lot more complicated and expensive. So receptive to it, but at the same time it was $75,000 to do the last one. I don't want to have a half a million dollar letter campaign.
David Williamson: Absolutely. The cost is a sensitive point. I was thinking of ways that would make the letter more interesting to the actual recipient. And make it flashy doesn't really help. It needs to be something that the text actually catches their attention and forces them to pay attention. And that's clearly a challenge.
John Curran: The certified nature I think helped in a lot of organizations. We actually did have organizations that returned address space. I had a company come back and say: Oh, I see you have me listed for something. We're not actually using it. We've double-checked. Here, have it back. It was like thank you, I could use more of those. But certifying it did help. I don't know what else we can do. Recognize almost any gimmick you do actually categorizes you in such a way that the CEO never opens it.
David Williamson: Absolutely. Thanks.
Paul Vixie: Left-hand microphone.
Martin Hannigan: Hi. I'm Martin Hannigan, ASO AC, and I'm going to speak on behalf of the authors of Draft Policy 2010-10 for a moment. Thank you for all your feedback and thank you for your overwhelming support yesterday. I noted that it was 40 to 5 in favor. And I know that the AC judges consensus, but I wanted to point that out. Specifically, Geoff Huston made a comment with regard to various registries. In the proposal there is a designation. There is an exception for designation as special use. We would encourage the AC to feel free to modify that to include various registries to address that issue. As well, we would also encourage the AC to reread the statement that is as follows: Units equal to or shorter than the longest of any RIR's policy defined minimum allocation unit. We think that that was interpreted backwards, but we'd also welcome a modification to that. We intend to talk to the shepherd after the meeting as well. Thank you very much.
Paul Vixie: Thank you, Marty.
Kevin Blumberg: Kevin Blumberg, the Wire. I understand that the v6 fee waiver is closing down next year. If you can correct me if I'm wrong on that. And over time there's been some concern with the minimum allocation for v6 now being the /32, there's been this, you know, if I'm a small provider, v4's $1250, v6 entry is now going to be $2250. And my suggestion is that the minimum allocation be blended in some way so that we're not preventing people or creating roadblocks at least in the next two to three years with v6 adoption.
Paul Vixie: Thank you, sir. Front microphone.
Scott Leibrand: Scott Leibrand here speaking for a remote participant. This is Tim McGuinness. He said: I'd like John Curran to explain how he thinks ITU decisions that are binding on nation states would also bind ICANN in terms of global numbering policies.
Paul Vixie: We're going to hold that until the end.
Rob Seastrom: Rob Seastrom, ARIN AC. My day job is Afilias, but I'm taking my Afilias hat off and putting my ClueTrust hat on. ClueTrust is one of those very small ISPs that Kevin just talked about. We have a /22 and a /32. And we do not have a whole bunch of customers. And the cost differential between being an extra-small ISP and being a small ISP is a fraction of what we pay Equinix for our rack space every month and it just doesn't matter.
Paul Vixie: Thank you very much. I see no one else at the queue. I see we have about four minutes before we're going to get kicked out of the room. I'm going to turn it back over to John to try and jam some ITU knowledge into that short span of time. Don't forget to recycle your badges.
John Curran: Okay. I'm actually -- I have to save a minute and a half for closing announcements. So the ITU question is actually pretty simple. All of the countries that are signatories to the ITU have already agreed to adhere to what comes out of the ITU from recommendations. So to the extent that the country that ARIN is in, for example, the United States, to the extent that the US government has already agreed what comes out of the ITU in form of recommendations, it doesn't matter if it's disagreed with a particular one, it's signed on and it has to adhere to all of them. You don't get to opt out of peace treaties.
So if you want to keep your spectrum and your satellite space and your standards and your settlement and your tariffs, you have to agree to accept the recommendations you don't like. If an Internet recommendation comes out that you don't like, the US government will still work with Congress to make laws to implement that. ARIN will be bound by those laws. ICANN located within the United States will be bound by those laws. So this is -- effectively governments have already agreed in advance to have a treaty organization to handle matters of telecommunication. If that treaty organization extends into Internet and telecommunication, then what comes out of that, in advance, all the governments that participate in that treaty have already agreed to work to diligently implement whatever recommendations come out. That diligent implementation would be binding the moment it became law. I know that ARIN begrudgingly, I would be telling you at the microphone, regardless of what your particular inclination, import, or policy that you wish is, ARIN obviously won't violate the laws of the places it operates in. So this is a very significant angle of approach that doesn't allow us readily to overcome the recommendations. That's why this is so important. Hope that answers the question.
John Curran: I want to move on to closing remarks. So first, yes, recycle your badges. Yes, fill out the meeting surveys, the meeting survey located on the back of your program. Please deposit it as you exit. Yes, the wireless is going down almost momentarily. Okay. One more thing, I want to thank the ARIN staff for putting this meeting together and making it happen.
John Curran: You do a wonderful job for everyone. I would like to thank our network connectivity provider, TELX. I don't know if Mike is here. And that's it. Thank you, everyone. I will see you in San Juan early next year.
(Meeting concluded at 12:01 p.m.