[ppml] Policy Proposal: Resource Reclamation Incentives

----- Original Message -----
From: Leo Bicknell <bicknell at ufp.org>
To: PPML at arin.net
Subject: Re: [ppml] Policy Proposal: Resource Reclamation
Incentives
Date: Mon, 2 Jul 2007 16:59:20 -0400

> In a message written on Mon, Jul 02, 2007 at 08:36:21PM
> > +0000, bmanning at vacation.karoshi.com wrote: ARIN does
> have an obligation to these address holders...  the
> > long/lean of  the argument is that they received their
> > addresses under certain terms and conditions...  and
> > forcing changes on those t&c's in a unilateral manner
> might be problematic.  Just like folks who signed
> 
> Or not.
> 
> Some of us registered our domain names back at a time when
> they were free.  At some point NSF/NSI decided we should
> pay a yearly fee, and simply started charging it.  There
> was no revolt.

There was no pending shortage either, and I seem to recall
an outcry when NSI implemented fees. I had to dig for $5. We
are magnitudes more users at this time so if domain names
were free today and the same thing happened, there would be
a riot. It's fair to say we had the equivalent riot back
then.

[ clip ]

> Let's put the cards on the table.  If ARIN were to pass a
> policy "All legacy holders must sign an RSA by December 31
> , 2008 or their entries will be removed from whois and
> in-addr.arpa." who would sue?  

AT&T? Ford? Level(3)? Apple? Haliburton?

> And yes, I mean sue because
> I'm sure a number of people would complain that they had
> to do it, but who thinks they have a strong enough case,
> and that it's worth spending $200k on court costs rather
> than agreeing to a $100 per year fee?

I'm not a lawyer so I can't comment as to whether anyone has
a case or not, but I can say that I believe that legacy IP
address space is property in some instances. That is the
issue isn't it? It's not about signing the RSA, it's about
giving up rights. You sign the RSA, you give up rights. It's
not about $100.00

Let's look at a few:

014/8   Jun 91   IANA - Public Data Network

        IANA is working on this one, it's a public x.25
network, from what I 
        understand.

034/8   Mar 93   Halliburton Company

        Good luck with making them sign an RSA. 

035/8   Apr 94   MERIT Computer Network
 
        NANOG, take this one 'just because'.

038/8   Sep 94   Performance Systems International

        Cogent. Blood. Stone.

045/8   Jan 95   Interop Show Network

        Now here's one to go after. Now we have "two" low
hangers. 

      
Reclamation is not as simple as it looks. *I don't support
Owen's policy*, but I support the intent. Amnesty is a one
shot deal, not a stop at the drive through convenience store
dropping off a token /20 for a bottle deposit refund every
now and then. 

We could consider creating a class of reclamation around
'inherited' space and start there. We are far less likely to
be tied down by entities who have taken space from defunct
companies or through slipping into their domain name. Let's
start with the people who have obviously gotten space
nefariously, regardless of whether it's in use or not. 

Components of an amnesty I would support:

- time limited
- "as is"
- by class
   inherited - less lenient, but case by case
   legacy /8 - much more liberal 
   other - to be defined


-M<