[ppml] Policy Proposal: Resource Review Process

[Dave Mohler]

See further explanations of my thinking in context.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ppml-bounces at arin.net [mailto:ppml-bounces at arin.net] On Behalf
Of
> Stephen Sprunk
> Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2007 8:14 AM
> To: Dave Mohler; ARIN PPML
> Subject: Re: [ppml] Policy Proposal: Resource Review Process
> 
> Thus spake "Dave Mohler" <MOHLER at graceland.edu>
> >A couple of concerns:
> >
> > - Would it be appropriate/important to specify in the policy that
> > the "results of the review" communicated to the organization in
> > paragraph 3 include the list of resources required to be returned?
> > (And I realize the intent is to require an amount of resources to be
> > returned and allow the organization some flexibility in determining
> > which specific blocks of IP addresses they could most easily
> > return consistent with the policy requirements.)
> 
> ARIN _could_ make suggestions, but I don't want to _require_ that they
do
> so, 

[Dave Mohler] 
Yes.  My concern is that the organization is asked to "return resources
as required" (paragraph 5).  Is it adequate for the purpose of this
policy to assume that ARIN will include a list of the size of block(s)
expected/"required" to be returned as part of that communication?

and your parenthetical comment explains exactly why.  The org has more
> information about the relative "value" of their various blocks, how
easy
> different parts could be renumbered, etc.  ARIN only cares about
what's
> used
> vs not.  If the org voluntarily returns space, they get the carrot of
> picking what gets returned; if not, they get the stick of ARIN
picking.
> 
> > - Paragraph 5 doesn't give any timeline in relation to paragraphs
> > 3 and 4.  For instance, if ARIN notified someone yesterday and they
> > don't voluntarily return the resources today, would ARIN be
authorized
> > by this policy to start the 6-month clock of paragraph 6 as early as
> > tomorrow?
> 
> In theory, that's possible, but it assumes ARIN to be evil.  

[Dave Mohler] 
Well, I wasn't really making that assumption!! ;-)  I feel that the
policy is the place that ARIN and organizations look to for
communicating their respective responsibilities.  As such, explicitly
communicating that "If, after a reasonable time, the organization does
not..." or, perhaps even more clearly, "If, after three months, the
organization has not contacted ARIN to arrange for the return of..."
would help future readers of the policy to understand these
expectations.

In looking back over the proposal with the benefit of these discussions,
I think I understand that the 6-month minimum clock essentially begins
when "ARIN [communicates] the results of the review to the
organization."  After that, it is up to the organization to return the
required amount of resources within the 6 months or demonstrate that
"good faith effort" toward returning those resources; otherwise ARIN can
unilaterally revoke its choice of the required amount of those
resources.  

If this accurately reflects the intent of the policy, I believe I've
identified my core misunderstanding.  I interpreted "voluntarily return"
as being something that the organization recognizes their lack of
compliance with policy based on the review and of their own free will
offers back resources to bring them into compliance.  It appears that
the communication of results is more in terms of "This is how much you
must return within 6 months in order to come back into compliance;
develop and implement your own plan or we'll take what we need."  I'm
not arguing about the need for such a policy, just pointing out that the
phrase "voluntary return" led me (and could likely lead others) to
different assumptions about the policy's intent.

Am I now getting the essence of the policy accurately?

Either way,
> exactly when the clock starts doesn't matter so much since one can
> negotiate
> a longer renumbering period if needed.
> 

[Dave Mohler] 
understood.

...
> 
> Stephen Sprunk      "Those people who think they know everything
> CCIE #3723         are a great annoyance to those of us who do."
> K5SSS                                             --Isaac Asimov
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> This message sent to you through the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List
> (PPML at arin.net).
> Manage your mailing list subscription at:
> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/ppml