[arin-ppml] Draft Policy 2009-4: IPv4 Recovery Fund

Ted Mittelstaedt tedm at ipinc.net
Tue Mar 24 15:13:37 EDT 2009


I do not agree with implementing such a policy at the
current time.  Once the IPv4 free pool is exhausted that
would be an appropriate time to do a study to see if
something like this would increase the rate of IPv4
return.  But if this is implemented now it will encourage
hoarding and speculation.

I also strongly oppose a policy like this that does not
contain a sunset clause.  Once a tipping point is reached
in IPv6 penetration, IPv4 will be in surplus and I don't
want to see ARIN paying for addresses that 6 months later
will be worthless.

Ted

> -----Original Message-----
> From: arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net 
> [mailto:arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net] On Behalf Of Member Services
> Sent: Monday, March 23, 2009 12:06 PM
> To: arin-ppml at arin.net
> Subject: [arin-ppml] Draft Policy 2009-4: IPv4 Recovery Fund
> 
> Draft Policy 2009-4
> IPv4 Recovery Fund
> 
> The following draft policy text is being posted for feedback 
> and discussion on the Public Policy Mailing List (PPML).
> 
> This draft policy was developed by the ARIN Advisory Council 
> (AC) from Policy Proposal 80: IPv4 Recovery Fund. The AC has 
> taken the proposal and developed it into a draft policy. The 
> AC was required to submit text to ARIN for staff and legal 
> assessment prior to selecting it as a draft policy. The 
> assessment, along with the text that was assessed, is located 
> below the draft policy.
> 
> On 20 March 2009 the ARIN Advisory Council (AC) selected Draft Policy
> 2009-4: IPv4 Recovery Fund for adoption discussion on the 
> PPML and at the upcoming Public Policy Meeting.
> 
> Draft Policy 2009-4 is below and can be found at:
> https://www.arin.net/policy/proposals/2009_4.html
> 
> We encourage you to discuss Draft Policy 2009-4 on the PPML 
> prior to the ARIN XXIII Public Policy Meeting. Both the 
> discussion on the PPML and at the Public Policy Meeting will 
> be used by the AC to determine the community consensus 
> regarding adopting this as policy.
> 
> The ARIN Policy Development Process can be found at:
> https://www.arin.net/policy/pdp.html
> 
> All of the Draft Policies under discussion can be found at:
> https://www.arin.net/policy/proposals/index.html
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Member Services
> American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN)
> 
> 
> ## * ##
> 
> 
> Draft Policy 2009-4
> IPv4 Recovery Fund
> 
> Date: 23 March 2009
> 
> Policy statement:
> 
> (Create new section in section 4, represented by "4.X".)
> 
> 4.X IPv4 Recovery Fund
> 
> 4.X.1 Implementation Timing
> 
> Upon receiving a valid request for a block larger than ARIN 
> can satisfy from its existing free pool, or, by obtaining 
> additional space from IANA, ARIN shall begin offering 
> financial incentives for returned IP blocks according to this policy.
> 
> 4.X.2 Recovery of IPv4 Space
> 
> ARIN believes that organizations should voluntarily return 
> unused and/or unneeded IP resources to the community. 
> However, upon implementation of this policy, ARIN will offer 
> financial incentives for the return of IPv4 resources to ARIN 
> relinquishment of any future claims to those resources. ARIN 
> will continue to accept voluntary returns.
> 
> 4.X.3 Allocation of Recovered Space
> 
> Once approved for IPv4 space ARIN will ask the requester to 
> specify a bid of how much they are willing to pay for 
> reclamation of address space. ARIN will use this bid in 
> determining what incentives to offer for return of space.
> The requester may make a higher bid at any time, which is 
> treated as a brand new bid replacing their old bid.
> 
> If ARIN recovers space and offers it to requester at or below 
> the specified bid within 60 days of the time the bid was made 
> then the bid shall be binding on requester at the price ARIN 
> offers the space.
> 
> 4.X.4 Address Block Management
> 
> ARIN may not offer a partial fill, that is provide a block 
> smaller than the one for which the requester was approved.
> 
> ARIN may split recovered blocks into multiple smaller blocks 
> at the staff's discretion using the following principals:
> - It is unlikely a request will be made for the address block 
> size involved in the next 60 days.
> - The block is divided into as few parts as practical.
> - There are enough bids to allow the entire block to be allocated.
> 
> 4.X.5 Transparency
> 
> ARIN staff shall make public the current and historical 
> prices of asks, bids, and executed transactions in a manor 
> that facilitates the bidding process. ARIN staff must 
> regularly report on the amount of address space obtained and 
> distributed via this mechanism, number of blocks subdivided, 
> as well as aggregate financial numbers.
> 
> 4.X.6 Cost Recovery
> 
> ARIN shall manage the address space recovery program with a 
> goal of cost recovery.
> 
> ARIN may:
> - Use ARIN funds to reclaim blocks when there is no specific 
> demand; if such reclamation is deemed in the best interest of 
> the community and there is a significant likelyhood of future demand.
> - Use a portion of the funds collected under this program to 
> pay for the implementation of this program.
> 
> Rationale:
> 
> Many have recognized that in order for unused or poorly used 
> IPv4 resources to be returned to the free pool that financial 
> compensation will be required. This is particularly the case 
> in poorly used assets where the current holder may have to 
> expend time and money to renumber in order to free the blocks.
> 
> This proposal sets up a fund administered by ARIN to 
> encourage the return of space. Effectively ARIN will offer 
> financial incentives to return unused or poorly used IPv4 
> resources and place them back into the
> IPv4 free pool.
> 
> The intention is for this activity to be revenue neutral to 
> ARIN. To achieve that goal those requesting IPv4 resources 
> will be requested to bid on a one-time payment to the 
> recovery fund to cover the cost of the resources they have received.
> 
> The proposal is intentionally vague on the exact 
> implementation details to staff because:
> 
> - Transactions with those returning space and obtaining space 
> may occur in any order.
> - The bidding process may need to evolve over time, and may 
> not be as simple as highest bidder wins. It may include 
> aspects such as a dutch auction style format (all winners pay 
> the lowest winning price), or may include other factors such 
> as which size blocks ARIN has free in an effort to limit 
> deaggregation.
> - ARIN will have to develop contracts and procedures around 
> this activity that are better suited for staff and legal than 
> the policy process.
> 
> Compared to other "transfer proposals", this proposal has the 
> following
> benefits:
> 
> - Maintains that IP addresses are not property.
> - Maintains the concept that unused addresses should be 
> returned to the free pool.
> - Maintains need based addressing.
> - Removes the need for those with excess resources to find 
> those without resources. There is no need for any sort of 
> listing service, eBay, etc.
> - All transactions are two party transactions with ARIN as 
> one of the parties. The potential for multi-party legal 
> disputes is reduced.
> - ARIN can absorb spikes in supply or demand, creating more 
> level prices over time.
> - ARIN can provide transparency across all transactions in 
> this system.
> - Reduces confusion to new entrants over where they should go 
> to receive address space.
> 
> Change Log:
> 
> - Changed "monetary" to "financial" to allow for the 
> possibility of ARIN offering things other than direct payment 
> (like fee credits). Credit: Robert Bonomi.
> - Updated numbering so there were not two 4.10.2's. Also 
> changed to using a place holder for section. Credit: Robert Bonomi
> - Changed the cost recovery language to be more clear and 
> provide some additional flexibility.
> - Clarified 4.10.2 about future claims. Credit: Ted Mittelstaedt
> - Split 10.X.3 into 10.X.3 and 10.X.3 with better titles.
> - Left the exact algorithm to staff. Removed examples as a result.
> 
> Timetable for implementation:
> 
> Staff should begin developing procedures and updated 
> templates immediately. Policy would not go into effect until 
> the criteria listed occurs.
> 
> 
> 
> #####
> 
> 
> ARIN Staff Assessment
> 
> * Title: IPv4 Recovery Fund*
> 
> *Proposal Submitted: 08 Jan 2009 *
> 
> *Date of Assessment: 10 March 2009*
> 
> I. Understanding of the Policy:
> 
> *Staff Understanding of the Proposal:*
> 
> ARIN understands this policy allows approved requestors of 
> IPv4 address space to place binding "bids" for the addresses 
> they have been approved.
> 
> In turn, ARIN can use the monies from those bids to offer 
> financial incentives to registrants of address space to 
> return unused or unneeded addresses to the free pool for 
> reissue to the approved requestors.
> 
> II. Comments
> 
> A. ARIN Staff Comments:
> 
>     * It is unclear to staff exactly when this policy would be
>       triggered. For example, if someone is approved for a 
> /9, and ARIN
>       has only bits of fragmented space left (/10, /12, /13, 
> etc.) which
>       together could fill a /9 request, would this trigger 
> this policy?
>       In other words, can ARIN use dis-contiguous smaller blocks or
>       would the requester be denied and asked to bid on a /9 
> that may be
>       returned in the future?
>     * The policy appears to say that once a request cannot be 
> filled, a
>       requester must make a bid. There does not seem to be an 
> option of
>       waiting for a block that is voluntarily returned. It would be
>       helpful if the policy specified that once the policy is 
> triggered,
>       there is no opting out, if this is indeed the case.
>     * Once the policy is triggered, it is difficult to tell whether
>       every request must then be filled via the bid process or if
>       requesters can choose not to use it. Again, it would be 
> helpful if
>       this were specifically spelled out in the policy text.
>     * Under section 4.X.3 what would happen if a requester doesn't pay
>       the bid amount they committed to? If ARIN is paying the money up
>       front for that address space but is unable to collect 
> that amount
>       back, it could put ARIN at some financial risk.
>     * The bidding process as laid out in section 4.X.3 is somewhat
>       confusing. There is no mention made of a situation 
> where there are
>       two bidders competing for the same address space. Would ARIN
>       automatically award the space to the highest bidder? If 
> so, could
>       that be viewed as an unfair process that rewards those with the
>       most monetary resources?
>     * If someone return's space without monetary compensation in the
>       midst of this, it is not clear whether ARIN would then 
> offer that
>       address space under the current fee structure or under this bid
>       structure.
>     * The term "cost recovery" in section 4x6 should be 
> clearly defined.
>       Specifically, this states that we can use "a portion" 
> of the funds
>       collected to recover space even when there is no demand.
>     * Is there anything to prohibit out of region bidders? ARIN's
>       current practice is to issue address space only to organizations
>       that will be using that space within ARIN's region. If 
> anyone can
>       bid on this space from any region, it will represent a 
> fundamental
>       change in the way we operate today.
>     * This policy would change ARIN's current financial and business
>       models and would significantly impact the way we do 
> business today.
>     * This policy could be a disincentive for people to voluntarily
>       return IP address space, which is something that people do on a
>       somewhat regular basis today.
> 
> B. ARIN General Counsel Comments:
> 
> Nothing in ARIN's Articles of Incorporation or Bylaws 
> prevents ARIN from implementing this policy.  However, this 
> policy would represent a major shift in ARIN's activities by 
> requiring ARIN to build business capabilities and undertake 
> legal risks quite different from ARIN's existing business and 
> expertise.
> 
> In particular, this proposal would require that ARIN staff 
> exercise skills as traders -- e.g. buying IPv4 resource when 
> they think they should buy, selling when they think they 
> should sell.  The required skills are not unlike those 
> involved in running a hedge fund or, perhaps, the US 
> government role in buying Strategic Petroleum Reserve assets. 
> The required skills are quite different from ARIN's core competency.
> 
> This proposal would also introduce potentially capital 
> requirements -- causing ARIN to invest its funds in purchases 
> of v4 resource in anticipation of future sales.  As a 
> nonprofit with a limited financial reserve, ARIN faces an 
> important financial risk from such transactions, in that ARIN 
> could lose significant funds if IPv4 prices do not evolve as 
> ARIN staff anticipate.
> 
> The proposal is relatively silent on the specifics of ARIN's 
> decision-making process for allocating the IPv4 resources 
> ARIN obtains through this process.  While it may be 
> appropriate to delegate those decisions to staff, it is 
> difficult to legally assess the proposal without a vision of 
> the decision rules ARIN would use in allocating scarce space 
> among multiple prospective recipients.  Moreover, because 
> many potential recipients will urgently want additional v4 
> space, such decisions are likely to be closely scrutinized, 
> and ARIN would need a clear and compelling reason to choose 
> to grant space purchased to one recipient rather than another.
> 
> This proposal also exposes ARIN to significant and 
> unameliorated legal risk. For example, in each potential 
> transfer, ARIN participates at least twice on "good" 
> transactions that go well -- one to receive space from an 
> original provider, then a second time to transfer that space 
> to an ultimate recipient.  But each transaction performed 
> presents legal risk.  For example, if a putative provider 
> promises to transfer, but reneges, ARIN might find itself 
> having to sue to compel such sale.
> 
> Conversely, if a putative provider wants to sell ARIN 
> addresses at a given price, but ARIN is unwilling to pay that 
> price, the provider might sue ARIN, alleging that ARIN's 
> decision to reject that price was wrongful.  (The provider 
> might ground its case in a purchase it sees as similar, in 
> which some other provider received that price.)  As to 
> recipients, ARIN might face liability from those who wanted 
> v4 resource but did not receive it (at the prices they sought 
> to offer), and ARIN might feel compelled to enter litigation 
> if a recipient ultimately refuses to pay for resources it 
> received.  In short, ARIN would face important legal risks 
> both due to the multiple sequential transactions and due to 
> disputes potentially resulting from ARIN's significant 
> decision-making discretion as to the purchase and allocation 
> of v4 resource.
> 
> These risks may be worth accepting in order to get the 
> benefits of address transfers.  However, ARIN faces 
> significantly less legal risk from a other proposed 
> decentralized markets where ARIN's role is not central (e.g. 
> , see the market portion of an abandoned policy, 2008-6) in 
> which address providers and recipients were left to their own 
> resources to reach agreements directly between one another, 
> without ARIN serving to receive and transfer all resources 
> and all associated funds.
> 
> 
> III. Resource Impact
> 
> The resource impact of implementing this policy is viewed as 
> significant. It is estimated that this policy could require 
> up to 18 person months of effort to implement following 
> ratification by the ARIN Board of Trustees. Because this 
> implementation is not planned, it may preempt ARIN's current 
> project deployment schedule. It may require the
> following:
> 
>     * The development of a tracking system to monitor the transaction,
>       both the purchase and the sale, as well as the inventory.
>     * The development of a reporting system.
>     * Modifications to ARIN's existing business model would be needed,
>       particularly if ARIN gets into the business of buying 
> back address
>       space which then becomes designated as an asset and inventory.
>     * Increased fees due to potential litigation, legal costs, and
>       collection costs
>     * Modifications to existing registration procedures
>     * Staff training
>     * Guidelines updates
> 
> Text assessed:
> 
> Policy Proposal Name: IPv4 Recovery Fund
> 
> *Policy statement:*
> 
> * (Create new section in section 4, represented by "4.X".)*
> 
> *4.X IPv4 Recovery Fund*
> 
> 4.X.1 Implementation Timing
> 
> Upon receiving a valid request for a block larger than ARIN
> 
> can satisfy from its existing free pool, or, by obtaining
> 
> additional space from IANA, ARIN shall begin offering financial
> 
> incentives for returned IP blocks according to this policy.
> 
> 4.X.2 Recovery of IPv4 Space
> 
> ARIN believes that organizations should voluntarily return
> 
> unused and/or unneeded IP resources to the community. However,
> 
> upon implementation of this policy, ARIN will offer financial
> 
> incentives for the return of IPv4 resources to ARIN
> 
> relinquishment of any future claims to those resources. ARIN
> 
> will continue to accept voluntary returns.
> 
> 4.X.3 Allocation of Recovered Space
> 
> Once approved for IPv4 space ARIN will ask the requester to
> 
> specify a bid of how much they are willing to pay for
> 
> reclamation of address space. ARIN will use this bid in
> 
> determining what incentives to offer for return of space.
> 
> The requester may make a higher bid at any time, which is
> 
> treated as a brand new bid replacing their old bid.
> 
> If ARIN recovers space and offers it to requester at or below
> 
> the specified bid within 60 days of the time the bid was
> 
> made then the bid shall be binding on requester at the price
> 
> ARIN offers the space.
> 
> 4.X.4 Address Block Management
> 
> ARIN may not offer a partial fill, that is provide a block
> 
> smaller than the one for which the requester was approved.
> 
> ARIN may split recovered blocks into multiple smaller blocks
> 
> at the staff's discretion using the following principals:
> 
> - It is unlikely a request will be made for the address
> 
> block size involved in the next 60 days.
> 
> - The block is divided into as few parts as practical.
> 
> - There are enough bids to allow the entire block to be
> 
> allocated.
> 
> 4.X.5 Transparency
> 
> ARIN staff shall make public the current and historical
> 
> prices of asks, bids, and executed transactions in a manor
> 
> that facilitates the bidding process. ARIN staff must
> 
> regularly report on the amount of address space obtained and
> 
> distributed via this mechanism, number of blocks subdivided,
> 
> as well as aggregate financial numbers.
> 
> 4.X.6 Cost Recovery
> 
> ARIN shall manage the address space recovery program with a
> 
> goal of cost recovery.
> 
> ARIN may:
> 
> - Use ARIN funds to reclaim blocks when there is no specific
> 
> demand; if such reclamation is deemed in the best interest
> 
> of the community and there is a significant likelyhood of
> 
> future demand.
> 
> - Use a portion of the funds collected under this program
> 
> to pay for the implementation of this program.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> PPML
> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to 
> the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML at arin.net).
> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
> Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.
> 
> 




More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list