[ppml] Policy Proposal: Resource Reclamation Incentives

[Owen DeLong]

On Jul 4, 2007, at 2:47 AM, <michael.dillon at bt.com> wrote:

>
>
>> I think that for most legacy holders, the "Fees" issue is a
>> matter of principle or a minor issue.  I think that the real
>> issues from the legacy holder perspective are:
>>
>> 	-	I don't get any benefit from signing an RSA
>
> You become a legitimate holder of IPv4 address allocations.
>
Whether you like it or not legacy holders are already legitimate
holders of IPv4 address allocations.
>> 	-	It subjects me to policies that could force me
>> to renumber
>
> It frees you from being forced to renumber when some other company
> decides to "borrow" your addresses due to IPv4 address shortages.
>
I have no reason to believe that will happen.
>> 	-	It subjects me to policies that could change at any time
>
> It gives you a formal vote in ARIN policies and since you are now a
> legitimate holder of address resources, other ARIN members are more
> likely to listen to your point of view.
>
I have as much input on ARIN policies now as I would have then.
What I might gain, if I joined ARIN as a member, would be a vote
on items discussed in the members meetings and the right to
vote for certain representatives.  However, I can become an ARIN
member without signing an RSA, so, again, this is not a benefit
of signing an RSA.
>> 	-	It potentially limits my options in terms of
>> what I can do
>> 		with my address space
>
> The only option I can see that disappears is the option to sell the
> addresses and this is pretty marginal if they are not legitimately
> registered with ARIN.
>
The option to sell the address space doesn't exist today.
However, currently, the only way for ARIN to reclaim my addresses
is through my voluntary surrender.  Otherwise, ARIN has no right
to them and no ability to "manage" them.  ARIN is just a record
keeper.  If I sign the current RSA, then, ARIN has the right of
reclamation if my address usage no longer meets ARIN policy.
This can happen whether that is a result of my changing usage
_OR_ ARIN's changing policy.  Today, I have no reason to fear
ARIN policy changes... They do not affect me.  If I sign an RSA,
that changes.
>> 	-	It costs me money
>
> Money is not an issue here. The sums are nominal. It can cost a lot  
> more
> in lawyers fees or forced renumbering when (not if) someone takes your
> addresses as we reach the point of IPv4 exhaustion.
>
Likely, I will recover the lawyers fees as part of the lawsuit.  More  
likely,
most ISPs will respect the original assignment and the lawsuit won't
really be necessary.  Even more likely, the person attempting to steal
my addresses will soon realize that all they are accomplishing is a
DOS attack on me and that the addresses are unusable by them
as well.

In the situation you describe, all that will happen is nobody can use  
the
address.  Not the legitimate legacy holder and not the later usurper.

>> I think it provides some encouragement towards reclamation.
>> I think that gentle reclamation efforts allowing people to
>> return address space in whatever size chunks they are willing
>> to and on whatever timetable they are willing to is more
>> likely to result in reclamation than policies which attempt
>> to force the issue.
>
> You seem to be presenting "reclamation" as a positive thing which we
> should bend over backwards to encourage and entice. I take a different
> view. Reclamation is an obligation under ARIN policies which require
> companies to *JUSTIFY* their address allocations. When that
> justification disappears, likely due to IPv6 migration, companies have
> an obligation to return the addresses to ARIN.
>
Companies that are not recipients of resources from ARIN have no
obligation to ARIN whatsoever.  I really do not understand where
people have developed the perspective that ARIN controls all of
this address space.  ARIN volunteered to keep records for this
space.  The do not control it unless the current holder voluntarily
returns it to ARIN or joins the ARIN process by voluntarily signing
an RSA.  Until one of those two things happen, they have a permanent
non-transferable right to use those addresses and ARIN has no right
to them.
> It is not too late for a controlled migration combined with  
> reclamation
> to prevent IPv4 exhaustion entirely.
>
You cannot prevent IPv4 exhaustion entirely.  For one thing, nothing
leads me to believe that IPv6 will achieve anything remotely resembling
critical mass prior to IPv4 exhaustion, regardless of how far you put  
off
IPv4 exhaustion.

Owen