[ppml] Policy Proposal 2007-14: Resource Review Process - Revise

[Member Services]

Policy Proposal 2007-14
Resource Review Process

The ARIN Advisory Council (AC), acting under the provisions of the ARIN
Internet Resource Policy Evaluation Process (IRPEP), determined that
while there is not community consensus in favor of the proposal there is
consensus that the proposal should be revised and discussed further. The
AC made this determination at their meeting at the conclusion of the
ARIN Public Policy meeting on 18 October 2007. The Chair of the AC
reported the results of the AC meeting during the Members Meeting. The
AC Chair's report can be found at:
http://www.arin.net/meetings/minutes/ARIN_XX/mem.html

The AC will work with the author of the proposal to revise the text and
return the proposal to the PPML for further discussion.

The policy proposal text is provided below and is also available at:
http://www.arin.net/policy/proposals/2007_14.html

The ARIN Internet Resource Policy Evaluation Process can be found at:
http://www.arin.net/policy/irpep.html

Regards,

Member Services
American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN)


## * ##


Policy Proposal 2007-14
Resource Review Process

Author: Owen DeLong, Stephen Sprunk

Proposal type: modify

Policy term: permanent

Policy statement:

Add the following to the NRPM:

Resource Review

1. ARIN may review the current usage of any resources issued by ARIN to
an organization. The organization shall furnish whatever records are
necessary to perform this review.

2. ARIN may conduct such reviews:

     a. when any new resource is requested,
     b. whenever ARIN has cause to believe that the resources had
originally been obtained fraudulently, or
     c. at any other time without cause unless a prior review has been
completed in the preceding 12 months.

3. ARIN shall communicate the results of the review to the organization.

4. If the review shows that existing usage is substantially not in
compliance with current allocation and/or assignment policies, the
organization shall return resources as needed to bring them
substantially into compliance. If possible, only whole resources shall
be returned. Partial address blocks shall be returned in such a way that
the portion retained will comprise a single aggregate block.

5. If the organization does not voluntarily return resources as
required, ARIN may revoke any resources issued by ARIN as required to
bring the organization into overall compliance. ARIN shall follow the
same guidelines for revocation that are required for voluntary return in
the previous paragraph.

6. Except in cases of fraud, an organization shall be given a minimum of
six months to effect a return. ARIN shall negotiate a longer term with
the organization if ARIN believes the organization is working in good
faith to substantially restore compliance and has a valid need for
additional time to renumber out of the affected blocks.

7. ARIN shall continue to maintain the resource(s) while their return or
revocation is pending, except no new maintenance fees shall be assessed
for the resource(s).

8. Legacy resources in active use, regardless of utilization, are not
subject to revocation by ARIN. However, the utilization of legacy
resources shall be considered during a review to assess overall compliance.

Delete NRPM sections 4.1.2, 4.1.3, 4.1.4

Remove the sentence "In extreme cases, existing allocations may be
affected." from NRPM section 4.2.3.1.
Policy Rationale

Rationale: ARIN feels that current policy does not give them the power
to review or reclaim resources except in cases of fraud, despite this
being mentioned in the Registration Services Agreement. This policy
proposal provides clear policy authority to do so, guidelines for how
and under what conditions it shall be done, and a guarantee of a
(minimum) six-month grace period so that the current user shall have
time to renumber out of any resources to be reclaimed.

The nature of the "review" is to be of the same form as is currently
done when an organization requests new resources, i.e. the documentation
required and standards should be the same.

The renumbering period does not affect any "hold" period that ARIN may
apply after return or revocation of resources is complete.

The deleted sections/text would be redundant with the adoption of this
proposal.

Timetable for implementation: Immediate