[ppml] Policy Proposal: Resource Reclamation Incentives

Leo Bicknell bicknell at ufp.org
Thu Jun 28 17:10:58 EDT 2007


In a message written on Thu, Jun 28, 2007 at 09:34:02AM -0700, Owen DeLong wrote:
> 			1.	If the organization does not currently pay ARIN
> 				fees, they shall remain fee exempt.

I'm not strongly opposed to this point, however I question it's
value.  ARIN implemented a $100 maintenance fee I believe largely
as a yearly "touch point" after previous expereince with no-fee
resources lead to many out of date records.  I'm totally down with
waving initial fees and maybe even a year or two, but I can't imagine
$100 going forward makes a big difference to anyone.

> 			2.	If the organization currently pays ARIN fees,
> 				their fees shall be waived for two years for
> 				each /20 equivalent returned, with any fractional /20
> 				equivalent resulting in a one-time single year waiver.

I'd roll #1 and #2 into "Pays no fees for two years."  Short, simple.
Again though, not enough to make me not support the proposal.

> 			3.	Any organization returning address space under
> 				this policy shall continue under their existing
> 				RSA or they may choose to sign the current RSA.
> 				For organizations which currently do not
> 				have an RSA, they may sign the current RSA, or,
> 				they may choose to remain without an RSA.

I strongly object to giving out any new resource that is not covered
by an RSA.  That's a deal breaker for me.

> 			4.	All organizations returning space under this
> 				policy shall, if they meet other eligibility
> 				requirements and so request, obtain an
> 				appropriate IPv6 end-user assignment
> 				or ISP allocation as applicable, with no fees
> 				for the first 5 years.  Organizations electing
> 				to receive IPv6 allocation/assignment under
> 				this provision must sign a current RSA and
> 				must agree that all of their IPv4 resources are
> 				henceforth subject to the RSA. Organizations
> 				taking this election shall be subject to end-user
> 				fees for their IPv4 resources not previously
> 				under an ARIN RSA.  If they are already an
> 				ARIN subscriber, then IPv4 resources
> 				affected by this process may, instead,  be added to
> 				their existing subscriber agreement at the
> 				address holder's discretion.

Sounds good.

I really like the concept here of finding a way to provide an
incentive to turn in old space for newer, more aggregateable, more
usable (IPv6) going forward.  However I feel very strongly we need
RSA's in place for new resources, the lack of one was a major
mistaken in the past we can't repeat.

-- 
       Leo Bicknell - bicknell at ufp.org - CCIE 3440
        PGP keys at http://www.ufp.org/~bicknell/
Read TMBG List - tmbg-list-request at tmbg.org, www.tmbg.org
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 187 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20070628/3c72abb8/attachment-0001.sig>


More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list