[arin-ppml] LRSA taking back addresses
stephen at sprunk.org
Wed Sep 10 10:37:21 EDT 2008
Cliff Bedore wrote:
> Quoting from the ARIN legacy page
> "Note that ARIN will not reclaim unutilized address space from legacy holders who sign this RSA, nor will ARIN attempt to take away legacy resources from organizations who choose not to sign it. However, signing the Legacy RSA contractually locks in a set of rights, and thus reduces the risk of future change to a minimum."
> Note the section that says " nor will ARIN attempt to take away legacy resources from organizations who choose not to sign it." So if I don't sign it, my address space is safe but if I sign it and then want to terminate for any reason, ARIN can reclaim the addresses. What's wrong with this picture?
That is the situation today (a point I think the FAQ doesn't make
clear), but future policy may change. For instance, next year, ARIN
could adopt a proposal to revoke all legacy space. Signing an LRSA
before that happened would contractually prevent ARIN from applying that
policy to you.
> At a minimum, the address space should fall back to the status of those who don't sign the LRSA at all.
I'd prefer that approach, actually. If a legacy holder doesn't abide by
the terms of the LRSA, their protection should simply terminate and
services should revert to the status of anyone else who never signed the
LRSA -- which, by that point, might mean total loss of services or even
revocation or it might just mean the same ambiguous status quo as
today. If I were depending on those resources for my business, I'd find
that worth $100/yr.
> Slightly tongue in cheek, the section "However, signing the Legacy RSA contractually locks in a set of rights, and thus reduces the risk of future change to a minimum." doesn't sound a whole lot different from two guys walking into a neighborhood store and saying "You know there's a lot of crime and arson in this area. If you sign a contract for our security service, your risks in this neighborhood will not be as high as if you don't sign with us."
That's only illegal if the crime is caused by the same organization as
the folks offering "protection". ARIN failing to provide services you
haven't paid for, however, is not a crime. Lots of companies offer you
the ability to lock in today's rate with a contract to protect against
potential rate hikes in the future, and that's perfectly legal. Lots of
legitimate security companies will offer you protection against crime in
addition to the minimal protection provided by the police.
More information about the ARIN-PPML