[arin-ppml] Policy Proposal 108: Eliminate the term license in the NRPM

John Curran jcurran at arin.net
Wed Feb 17 23:40:55 EST 2010

On Feb 12, 2010, at 9:44 AM, David Farmer wrote:
> The idea was to clearly state that number resource are not property and that the RSA and the policies in the NRPM are in control of how number resource are allocated and assigned.
> In my view the NRPM shouldn't should like a contract, that kind of language generally belongs in the RSA.  But this is an important enough concept that having it stated in both the NRPM and the RSA makes sense.
> This got started because of section 6.4.1 currently in the NRPM and especially its use of the term license.  So, at almost the last minute, I though of searching the NRPM for any other uses of the term license, and found the one in 11.4 too.  It seemed that it could be eliminated without a complete rewrite of that section.  This change to 11.4 could probably have been made as a editorial change, but since 6.4.1 needed a complete rewrite and such a change needed to go through the PDP, it seemed appropriate to tack this additional simple change on to that process.

Folks - 

As noted by David Farmer above, the purpose of this proposal is 
to clean up language which referenced the term "license" in the 
NRPM, as the term might be interpreted in conflict with the 
Resource Services Agreements between ARIN and resource holders.  

ARIN performs address allocations under the framework which was 
established by the IETF in RFC2008 and RFC2050, both of which 
are recognized as Best Current Practice (BCP) documents via the 
IETF process. ARIN recognizes the IETF's responsibility to provide
this framework as part of their specifications for the Internet 
Protocol (IP) itself.

Those interested in the nature of the Internet Protocol (IP) number 
resource allocations should also review those BCP documents as they 
provide significant background which is helpful in understanding 
the context in which allocations are made under RSA agreement.

The objective of Policy Proposal 108 is an administrative change, 
not a modification of the existing policy intention.  As such, after 
careful review, I have recommended to the Advisory Council (ARIN AC) 
that policy proposal 108 be abandonded, so that ARIN Counsel & staff
may develop an administrative change with the appropriate language.  
Per existing practice, such a change will be sent to the ARIN AC for 
their review prior to action by the ARIN Board of Trustees.

Thank you,

John Curran
President and CEO

More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list