IPv4 Market Group on ARIN33

I recently attended ARIN 33 in Chicago, my first in-person ARIN meeting, as Jeff Mehlenbacher, Executive VP of IPv4 Market Group, usually goes. The meeting spent the better part of two days on several policy proposals targeted at large global companies and small issues. There was a review of the statistics which say that there are 32 proposals across 5 regional internet registries, but only 2 of these are on IPv6. And ARIN has done a customer survey that finds that ARIN is regarded as bureaucratic.

No surprises there. But in reviewing the policies that the meeting was focused on, two key issues were not tackled.

1. With only 1.00 /8’s left, what will happen with new companies that need IPs after ARIN runs out? Current policy says companies cannot complete an IPv4 transfer if they don’t already have IPv4 addresses. As Leslie Nobile of ARIN pointed out, something needs to be tabled here, or new businesses that emerge after run-out, which could be as early as six months from now, will not be able to buy IPv4 addresses.
2. ARIN continues to enforce extremely stringent needs justification requirements on companies seeking resources via the IPv4 transfer market: the assessment criteria for justifying a /22 from the free pool based on 90-day need is identical to the criteria applied for a /19 transfer based on 24 month need. This is problematic because a) it is out of sync with the direction taken by other RIRs such as RIPE, which has no needs; b) it places undue workload on the applying company and ARIN staff; c) it biases the application process in favor of those who know, through experience and repetition, how to manage the system (usually large companies), versus those who do not (usually smaller companies); d) it puts lots of highly confidential business information into the hands of ARIN, which is inappropriate; e) it blocks an accurate registry when companies are purchased to avoid registry updates; and f) needs justification is often touted as a means to prevent IPv4 hoarding, and there are much better means to prevent this.

At the end of day two, I met with four members of the ARIN Advisory Council to discuss these two issues. I am pleased to report that Andrew Dul will author a policy to take on the need for a block for new entrants after run-out, and I will again attempt to table a policy to reduce needs justification in the ARIN region.

To complete the report on policies that were discussed, there are a few worth noting:

• (2012-2) Should companies be allowed to transfer old blocks that are in use in other regions to the relevant RIR and still obtain new blocks from ARIN?  My attitude is, “why not?” The IPs are already utilized, and it is a business need to route them and register them where they are used. If they need new IPs, they have as much right as anyone to the free pool. ARIN IPv4 allocations will probably run out before ARIN’s slow mechanizations can implement this anyway.

This proposal will not help companies that are not global, but is not a bad thing to allow freer use of IPs on a global basis.

• (2012-1) Current policy doesn’t allow or deny out of region use of ARIN registered resources. The new policy will allow such use based on ARIN utilization rules.
• (2014-9) Correct the 8.2 Transfer Process so it does not conflict with the RSA. Currently the 8.2 Transfer process speaks to IPv4 reclamation and needs justification, neither of which are part of the RSA. As a result, companies don’t bring the registry up to date and don’t undertake 8.2 transfers. While I would not recommend signing an RSA or undertaking an 8.2 transfer without some good reason, removal of reclamation language and needs justification is always a good idea.

I spoke on these policies at the ARIN 33 meeting in Chicago. Watch my video on YouTube and stay tuned to the IPv4 Market Group blog for more comments on the process to reduce needs justification.