[arin-ppml] Policy Proposal: Extend Experimental Renewal Timeframe

Leo Bicknell bicknell at ufp.org
Fri Jun 20 16:32:10 EDT 2008

In a message written on Fri, Jun 20, 2008 at 01:11:24PM -0700, David Meyer wrote:
> 	I haven't, but I still don't understand the point of the
> 	one year renewal. That's really not much time to get
> 	something built, deployed, and to get experience with
> 	whatever it is you're trying to build/deploy.

The ARIN community has been extremely supportive of ARIN contacting
resource holders once per year in an effort to make sure contact
is not lost.  This helps keep whois up to date, among other things.
For a "regular" customer, this is done by sending them a yearly
bill which they pay and return.

For Experimental allocations the $500 fee (as I understand it) is
one-time, when the block is allocated.  There is no yearly contact
as a result of billing activity.

I think one of the things the community was looking for in crafting
this policy in the first place was to insure there was outreach at
least once a year to make sure someone was still using the block
and the contact information was still good.  This also puts
experimental address holders on par with all other address holders
who are contacted once a year.

I'm fairly positive no one expects the experiments to be complete
in a year.

If the current language is a concern ("rejustifing the block")
perhaps it would be better to remove that and just charge the $500
fee annually, as ARIN does with all other blocks?

       Leo Bicknell - bicknell at ufp.org - CCIE 3440
        PGP keys at http://www.ufp.org/~bicknell/
-------------- 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/20080620/e569c136/attachment.sig>

More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list