[ppml] Policy Proposal 2007-14 - Staff Assessment
Member Services
info at arin.net
Wed Oct 17 09:46:02 EDT 2007
- Previous message: [ppml] Policy Proposal 2007-17 - Staff Assessment
- Next message: [ppml] Policy Proposal 2007-17: Legacy Outreach and Partial Reclamation
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Revised Staff Assessment - 17 October 2007 Policy Proposal 2007-14 Resource Review Process ARIN Staff Assessment The assessment of this proposal includes comments from ARIN staff and the ARIN General Counsel. It contains analysis of procedural, legal, and resource concerns regarding the implementation of this policy proposal as it is currently stated. Any changes to the language of the proposal may necessitate further analysis by staff and Counsel. I. Proposal Policy Proposal is available as Annex A below and at: http://www.arin.net/policy/proposals/2007_14.html II. Understanding of the proposal This policy proposal provides clear policy authority to audit or reclaim resources, guidelines for how it shall be done, and a guarantee of a (minimum) six-month grace period so that the current user shall have time to stop using any resources to be reclaimed. III. Comments A. ARIN Staff 1) 2c does not reconcile with the RSA, which grants ARIN authority to request any data necessary and does not specify any sort of limitation to frequency. 2) Point 3 requires ARIN notify an organization each time a review is conducted. ARIN interprets a review to mean a full audit of an organization's resources conducted by ARIN staff. 3) Point 4 uses the terms “single aggregate block”.and “whole resources”. Are these terms used synonymously to refer to a single CIDR prefix, or to “a contiguous range of addresses”? 4) Point 6 compels ARIN to take action which doesn’t reconcile with the RSA, which (as articulated above) allows ARIN to take whatever action is necessary. 5) Author did not indicate placement in the NRPM. We would insert as "Section 12 Resource Review Process." B. ARIN General Counsel "Counsel strongly supports some version of this policy being enacted and believes adoption of this policy will save significant future legal fees. This policy proposal spells out a series of customary and contractual policies and rights that are important to make as clear as possible. Counsel does not agree with that portion of the description which states ARIN "feels that current policy does not give them the power...." And believes such powers are adequately vested in ARIN' but believes instead such powers can always be more carefully delineated for ease of understanding." IV. Resource Impact – Minimal The resource impact of implementing this policy is viewed as minimal. Barring any unforeseen resource requirements, this policy could be implemented within 30 – 90 days from the date of the ratification of the policy by the ARIN Board of Trustees. Depending on the impact to RSD this may require additional staff. It will require the following: Guidelines Changes Registration System Changes Staff training May increase RSD workload May increase turnaround times Respectfully submitted, Member Services American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN) ##*## Annex A 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. 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. 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
- Previous message: [ppml] Policy Proposal 2007-17 - Staff Assessment
- Next message: [ppml] Policy Proposal 2007-17: Legacy Outreach and Partial Reclamation
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the PPML mailing list