[ppml] Revised Policy Proposal Resource Reclamation

Hello

On May 1, 2007, at 1:18 PM, Stephen Sprunk wrote:

<SNIP>

> All true, but if the space _does_ show up in the routing table,  
> that creates
> the presumption that it's in use.  If ARIN could contact the org  
> and they
> justified private use, that's within current policy as well.  Orgs are
> encouraged to use RFC1918 space on private networks, but they can  
> get direct
> assignments for private use if they insist.  That may change as we get
> closer to (or past) exhaustion, though.
>

Is there an enumeration of the amount of space that is assigned for  
private use ?

Regards
Marshall


>> 3) Universities with a /8 (or other size) who have not asked for
>> space recently, may be worth approaching for reclaimation;
>
> IIRC, at least one has done so voluntarily.  Others might be  
> convinced if
> ARIN asked nicely.  Still others might be forced to do so if the  
> community
> agrees that's fair and necessary -- and counsel can figure out how  
> to make
> it stick.
>
>> those that have added space to their initial allocations, have
>> probably done their justifications recently.
>
> And if so, we'll look elsewhere.
>
>> Those who ignore ARIN may be legally justifed in doing so --
>> they did not get their space from ARIN, so have not agreed to
>> the RSA.  Does ARIN have legal control over their space?  If I
>> were them, I'd legally argue no, and by the time it gets settled,
>> it'd probably moot.  (not that I don't question why some early
>> allocations continue to have huge amounts of space, not only
>> /8's. but also multiple /16's and /24's)
>
> OTOH, since there's no RSA signed and no fees paid, one could argue  
> that
> ARIN has no obligation to keep maintaining that space or to refrain  
> from
> issuing it to someone else.
>
> I can legally refuse to pay to register my car and sign the papers,  
> but if I
> don't, the state can reuse my license plate number; they're only  
> obligated
> to keep my registration unique if I pay them.  I'm sure others can  
> come up
> with equally-flawed analogies to support arguments either way :)
>
>> FWIW, My last count was 12 assigned /8's that weren't in the
>> global routing tables. If we pushed those folks, they'd just
>> announce some small prefix somewhere, and it'd be announced.
>> That the rest of their network is FW'd off from you is their
>> business.  Just because they don't announce it today, doesn't
>> mean they aren't entitled to the space.  Plus, they probably never
>> signed an ARIN RSA, a few are international, government or
>> multi-national, so ARIN's legal ability to smack down may be a
>> long and rocky road.
>
> I agree that there's lots of problems to be settled with how we  
> treat legacy
> space.  This proposal, however, doesn't attempt to address that; I was
> merely using it as a hypothetical case of how a significant policy  
> change
> could make reclamation useful.
>
> If/when someone floats a proposal on the exact status of legacy  
> space, Mr.
> Ryan will have his work cut out for him.  Until then, conventional  
> thinking
> is that it can't be revoked but does count in a justification  
> review, e.g.
> it could be used as the basis for revoking non-legacy resources if  
> the org
> is not within policy overall.
>
> S
>
> Stephen Sprunk      "Those people who think they know everything
> CCIE #3723         are a great annoyance to those of us who do."
> K5SSS                                             --Isaac Asimov
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> This message sent to you through the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List
> (PPML at arin.net).
> Manage your mailing list subscription at:
> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/ppml