[arin-ppml] Revision to 2007-14

[David Farmer]

Owen,

I support the goals of this proposal, and think these are important changes, 
but I'm concerned that you delete 4.1.2, 4.1.3, and 4.1.4 and I'm not sure 
you completely replace their functions.

1. NRPM 4.1.2 says "IP address allocations are valid as long as the 
utilization and other relevant criteria continue to be met, and the yearly fee is 
submitted."  I believe some place in NRPM we need to say if you no longer 
need IP address allocations then you should return them. NRPM 4.1.2 
comes the closest to saying that, and I don't see where you convey that idea 
in your proposal.  

This is motherhood and apple pie type stuff, but it needs to be said.  As Leo 
pointed out in another thread this is covered in RFC 2050, and by reference 
in NRPM 4.1.7, however I believe this is an important enough concept that it 
should be explicit in the NRPM some place.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that ARIN policy shouldn't imply that you can 
keep your IP allocations until ARIN asks you to return them.  Therefore 
there needs to be some kind of statement to that effect and in my opinion 
4.1.2 comes the closest to that in the NRPM now.  It would be better to have 
something that says that more directly, but 4.1.2 is better than nothing.  

2. NRPM 4.1.3 says "ARIN may invalidate any IP allocation if it determines 
that the requirement for the address space no longer exists."  Do you intend 
that the only way ARIN can recover IP allocations is through this Resource 
Review Process?  If not, then what policy gives ARIN the ability to do it, if 
this is no longer available?

3. NRPM 4.1.4 says "In the event of address space recall, ARIN will make 
every reasonable effort to inform the organization that the addresses are 
being returned to the free pool of IPv4 address space."  I guess if you intend 
that the only way ARIN can recover IP allocations is through this Resource 
Review Process then you can probably safely delete this.  Otherwise it is still 
probably needed or something similar.

4 Since  #1 states "ARIN may review the current usage of any resources 
maintained in the ARIN database."  I assume this means IPv4, IPv6, and 
ASN resources.  So I recommend this with become its own section, or it be 
duplicated as subsection under 4, 5, and 6.  Probably called "Resource 
Review"

5. #1. states  "... The organization shall cooperate with any request  from 
ARIN for reasonable related documentation."  What is the recourse if the 
organization fails to cooperate with ARIN, I feel this should be explicit.  Can 
ARIN assume they are "materially out of compliance with current ARIN 
policy"?  

There should probably be a response time frame specified too.  Something 
like "ARIN shall provide a minimum of 10 business days for a organization to 
produce the requested documentation.  ARIN may negotiate a response 
time with the organization, if ARIN believes the organization is working in 
good faith to produce the requested documentation."


On 6 Oct 2008 Owen DeLong wrote:

......

> #################################################################
> Policy Proposal 2007-14
> Resource Review Process
> Author: Owen DeLong, Stephen Sprunk
> Proposal Version: 3.1
> Date: 14 August 2008
> Proposal type: modify
> Policy term: permanent
> Policy statement:
> Add the following to the NRPM:
> Resource Review

.....

> Delete NRPM sections 4.1.2, 4.1.3, 4.1.4
 
......

=======================================================
David Farmer				     Email:	farmer at umn.edu
Office of Information Technology
Networking & Telecomunication Services
University of Minnesota			     Phone:	612-626-0815
2218 University Ave SE			     Cell:		612-812-9952
Minneapolis, MN 55414-3029		     FAX:	612-626-1818
=======================================================