[ppml] Policy Proposal: Resource Reclamation Incentives

[michael.dillon at bt.com]

> There already _is_ a special class: legacy holders.  Counsel 
> has indicated that all we can do is incent such folks into 
> becoming part of the normal class, not force them into 
> compliance, and this proposal attempts to use one of the few 
> carrots ARIN has at its disposal.

Who said anything about forcing them? 

In my view, there is *NO* special class of address holders. Those legacy
holders are not a special class, they are either ignorant of the rules
or they are blatantly flouting the rules. In either case, they are *NOT*
a special class and have no special rights. If it ever came to it in the
courts, the likelihood is that the courts will once again rule that
legacy address holders must comply with the ARIN rules and policies
which all other address holders comply with.

The playing field must be made as level as we can without extraordinary
effort. That's why we don't actively take legacy holders to court and
try to force them to sign the RSA and pay their fare share of the fees.
To do that would be extraordinary effort. But at the same time we must
not in any way actively provide benefits to those who flout the rules
and leech off the rest of us. If these organizations are going to
continue to flout the rules, I would rather leave them in exactly the
same state they are today, not provide the benefit of an aggregate
allocation.

Also, note that an organization must exert considerable effort to
renumber into a new allocation, and the only real reason to do that is
to be a good network citizen. But if they want to be a good network
citizen, then they can simply sign the RSA, start paying membership
fees, and turn back any extra addresses that they may have. This is all
possible today with no change in policy.

--Michael Dillon