[ppml] Policy Proposal 2007-17 - Staff Assessment
Owen DeLong
owen at delong.com
Tue Oct 16 14:30:30 EDT 2007
This appears to be an evaluation of the original 2007-17 proposal
without
regard to the updated version which was submitted.
The revised proposal addresses most of the concerns expressed by staff
and counsel. Below is the message I sent on September 15 which
contains the revised policy:
> Specific ideas incorporated into this proposal:
> 1. Specific fee statements removed. Fees are not the realm
> of IRPEP, so, it is replaced with a requirement for the BoT
> to develop appropriate incentives.
>
> 2. An oversight in the original version did not provide a
> timeframe in which addresses were to be returned.
> This version adopts a 12 month timeframe with staff
> discretion for up to 2 extensions of 6 months each.
>
> 3. This proposal differs from the existing section 4.6 in
> that it places discretion over whether a subnet of
> a returned block may be retained or not in the hands
> of the address holder. There was some suggestion
> from some AC members that this discretion should
> only be given to legacy holders while ARIN staff should
> retain discretion over non-legacy resources. I do not
> have a strong opposition to such a change, but, I do
> feel that the policy is actually better as is, so, I have
> chosen not to add this revision. I would like to see
> discussion on this area, and, if it is possible, I would
> like this version to allow the AC discretion to gauge
> consensus on whether this edit should be added
> prior to last call.
>
>
> Revised proposal is as follows:
>
>
> Policy Proposal 2007-17
> Legacy Outreach and Partial Reclamation
>
> Author: Owen DeLong
>
> Proposal Version: 1.0
> Submission Date: 2007 September 15
>
> Proposal type: modify
>
> Policy term: permanent
>
> Policy statement:
>
> Modify section 4.6 as follows:
>
> 4.6 Amnesty Requests:
>
> ARIN will accept the return or relinquishment of
> any address space from any existing address holder. If the address
> holder wishes to aggregate into a single block, ARIN may work with the
> address holder to arrive at an allocation or assignment which is equal
> to or smaller than the sum of their existing blocks and which best
> meets
> the needs of the existing holder and the community. The organization
> returning the addresses shall have 12 months from the date they
> receive
> their new addresses to return the addresses under this policy.
> Organizations
> may request no more than 2 six month extensions to this time, which,
> may be granted at ARIN the discretion of ARIN staff. There shall be no
> fee for returning addresses under this policy. Further, organizations
> returning addresses under this policy shall receive the following
> benefits:
>
> 1. If the organization does not currently pay ARIN fees, they shall
> remain fee exempt.
>
> 2. The BoT shall develop an incentive program to encourage such
> returns. Such incentives may include fee reductions and/or other
> such mechanisms as the BoT deems appropriate.
>
> 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.
>
> 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 and ASN 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.
>
> Rationale:
>
> The current amnesty policy does a nice job of facilitating
> aggregation,
> which was the intent when it was drafted. However, as we approach IPv4
> free-space exhaustion, the community now has an additional need to
> facilitate address reclamation.
>
> A very high percentage of underutilized space is in the hands of
> legacy
> holders who currently have no benefit to joining the ARIN process.
> Further, there is an unfortunate perception that doing so will require
> force the legacy holder into certain future disadvantages. This
> proposal
> attempts to resolve both of those issues while also providing some
> incentive to legacy organizations to start using IPv6 resources and
> bring their IPv4 resources into the ARIN process.
>
> This policy attempts to provide some benefit and remove most of the
> costs of making partial IPv4 returns. It also attempts to provide an
> incentive for these IPv4 holders to join the ARIN process.
>
> It is suggested that the BoT adopt fee incentives such as the
> elimination of 2 years of ARIN fees for each /20 returned.
>
>
> Timetable for implementation: Immediate
>
>
Sorry for any confusion.
Owen
More information about the ARIN-PPML
mailing list