[ppml] Policy 2002-5

[william at elan.net]

We still have several issues that needs to be addressed possibly as
separate policies.

1. What will happen when member of arin paying for say /20 returns most of 
the block and now has say /23. It is unfair to charge that company as 
it was paying before for much smaller block. ARIN needs to create new 
billing scale with more then 4 levels. This new scale will also be usefull 
for several other proposed policies and the idea of new billing scale had 
been several times before, but this policy just makes it even more pressing
to have this worked on sooner.

2. If company is giving up its ip blocks and it previously had blocks in 
normal arin class-a (i.e. 207, 209, 216, 64, etc), some isps have filters 
that will not allow advertisements of space < /20. Hence in this case ARIN 
should allocate new replacement block from different class-A. However ARIN 
had previously said it would not be allocating any blocks from the old 
"swamp" space, hence it would be necessary have some separate large ip 
block (class-A or possibly smaller) designated as new allocation block for 
blocks smaller then /20 that ARIN would provide as replacement. We do have 
something like this in ARIN's micro-allocation policy and I think this 
needs to be extended as general policy for small allocation that ARIN 
makes:
  - ARIN allocations and assignments of blocks smaller then its current 
minimum allocation for new members should be made from specific blocks 
reserved for this purpose. ARIN should make a list of these blocks 
publicly available.

3. As had been stated in other discussions we have a problem that some 
blocks that have been returned might have been used for activities that 
caused them to be blocked at some isps (blacklisted blocks). Clearly 
if such blocks are reissued it would create problems, so I think its 
important that information about which ip block had been returned to ARIN 
be made available. This can be separate small policy that would apply to 
all situation where ARIN gets blocks back and puts it into "unallocated" 
category, i.e. something like this:
  - ARIN should make publicly available list of blocks that had been 
previously allocated and then returned back to ARIN. ARIN should wait
12 months or more before re-allocating previously returned blocks.

I think year will be enough for blacklist operators to remove the blocks, 
perhaps waiting period could even be shorter.

4. As had been stated in discussions of 2002-6, its possible that 2002-6 
as well as 2002-5 maybe used to get replacements for blocks that had been 
put in the blacklists (i.e. spammer trying to get new ip block as replacement
for its current block). While I really do not like this, I do not necessarily
think that ARIN should become "net-police" and I don't think this along 
should be used not to pass policy that would otherwise be in benefit of 
internet community.
  But clearly arin should keep some kind of statistics of who uses these 
policies and not necessarily allow for immediate use of the policy 
(especially if somebody where to try to use it twice!).
  Possibly also the list of blocks to be exchanged due to 2002-5 and 
2002-6 policies can be made made available prior to the block being 
completed returned.  The above suggestion in #3 was for list to be 
published after the block is returned, but perhaps list can also be 
published for blocks that are expected to be returned as well and if the 
list states when the block would no longer be used, then waiting period
before ARIN could reuse the block could be shorter too. Additionally 
probably it should be allowed for somebody to comment to ARIN (perhaps to 
specially designated email) when the block being returned had been in 
blacklists and possibly company that had it was involved in questionable
activities. I'm not certain ARIN should actually do anything due to this 
complaints, but perhaps keeping statistics of how often this happens 
would be usefull for future discussions and policy making.

---
William Leibzon
william at elan.net

On Tue, 3 Dec 2002, Taylor, Stacy wrote:

> Greetings All,
> 
> To make good on my campaign promise to make our policies comply with the
> standards of the English language, I have altered policy 2002-5.  How do you
> like this?
> 
> 
> If an organization, whether a member or non-member, ISP or end-user,
> relinquishes a larger block of portable address space to ARIN, they will be
> allowed to receive a smaller block, /24 or shorter, in exchange.   The
> organization will not be required to justify their use of the new, smaller
> block.  The organization must return the block to be exchanged within 12
> months.  ARIN staff shall, at their discretion, determine whether the
> smaller replacement block shall be a subnet of the returned block, or a
> block allocated from some different range. 
> If any of the relinquished blocks had associated maintenance fees, then the
> new block will be subject to the appropriate fees for that block size.
> Likewise those without maintenance fees shall remain so.
> 
> 
> I am also interested in continuing the discussion on the relative merits of
> this policy.
> 
> Hope you had a great Thanksgiving!
> Stacy
>