[arin-discuss] ARIN billing practice
scheesman at level365.com
Mon Sep 21 16:50:02 EDT 2009
Maybe I'm just simplifying this too much, but why doesn't ARIN just do everything possible (Articles of Incorporation, verification of identity, etc) so that when spammers do misuse these blocks the authorities actually have good contact information for those responsible? As it was said, ARIN is not a policing body, but that doesn't mean that they can't enact policies that will help those that can police.
From: arin-discuss-bounces at arin.net [mailto:arin-discuss-bounces at arin.net] On Behalf Of David Farmer
Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 4:33 PM
To: Owen DeLong; arin-discuss at arin.net
Subject: Re: [arin-discuss] ARIN billing practice
On 21 Sep 2009 Owen DeLong wrote:
> What about a policy that covers the situation of repeated receipt and
> reclamation? For example:
> 1. Standard process applies the first time you get address space
> as it does today.
> 2. You return the space or fail to pay your bill.
> 3. You come back for a second round of addresses on a new "initial"
> application. Based on your history, you are expected to front a deposit
> for your next two years renewal as well, 50% of which is refundable
> if you return your space at the end of the first year. (In other words,
> you pay 3 years up front, if you only use 1, you get 1 back, costs you
> two.) If you use for more than a year, the deposit is forfeit, but,
> you don't
> owe fees until you begin your fourth year of utilization.
Refunds can create accounting issues, they may be
considered future liabilities and need to be carried on the
books until the second year of registration is started. I'm not
an accountant so I don't know all the details. But I know
accountants don't like refunds, especially ones built-in to a
process. I suspect this is why ARIN has no refunds written into
their current contracts. So I would suggest going with a non-
refundable charge even at this step.
> 4. You return the space, get your one year refund, and subsequently
> apply for a 3rd round of addressing on yet another new application.
> 5. This time, you're still charged on the 3-year deposit basis, but,
> it is
> completely non-refundable.
I guess I wouldn't oppose such a process, procedure, or policy.
But, I would want some evidence that it would have an effect.
FWIW, this sounds more like a billing procedure or issues to
me, that staff and the board should deal with rather than a
policy that should go through the Policy Development Process.
This doesn't seem to negatively effect the normal good actors,
and wouldn't even greatly effect people that don't pay there
bills on time. First they would have to let the bill go more than
a year delinquent, and then they would just have to pay ahead
a little. They still get two or three years of registration, they are
just required to pay it a head of time.
But, no one should view this as a magic bullet. As has been
said this kind of thing isn't really going to stop spamers or other
bad actors. At best it might stop a few of the dumb or lazy
ones, it really only slightly raises the bar for most spamers.
Finally, this would really need to be happening more than once
or twice a year to justify making any changes to the processes.
If something like this were put into place how often would it
come into effect? And, how many of those are suspected
David Farmer Email:farmer at umn.edu
Office of Information Technology
Networking & Telecomunication Services
University of Minnesota Phone: 612-626-0815
2218 University Ave SE Cell: 612-812-9952
Minneapolis, MN 55414-3029 FAX: 612-626-1818
You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
the ARIN Discussion Mailing List (ARIN-discuss at arin.net).
Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.
More information about the ARIN-discuss