[arin-ppml] Draft Policy 2010-1: Waiting List for Unmet IPv4 Requests

Stephen Sprunk stephen at sprunk.org
Wed Jan 27 23:44:42 EST 2010


Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:
> Stephen Sprunk wrote:
>> 2007-14, now NRPM section 12, was supposed to address this.  I don't
>> think there's any new policy needed; we just need to get ARIN more
>> active in _implementing_ the existing policy.
>
> Section 12 wasn't supposed to address this.  Section 12 exists mainly
> so that if ARIN gets a credible fraud report of an existing address
> holder that they can commence proceedings to revoke the allocation
> without having to go to a court and sue the address holder for breach
> of contract.

As one of the co-authors of 2007-14--and the one who wrote the majority
of the text that made it into the final policy--I know _exactly_ what my
intent was: to give ARIN clear authority to clean up space that was no
longer justified since my previous suggestion to do so via the ACSP was
rejected on the basis that ARIN had no such policy authority.

Owen's intent may have been different; I'll let him speak to his if he
so desires.

> Note the language:
>
> "...1.ARIN may review..."
>
> The may places this section as an OPTIONAL section, ARIN is not
> obligated to conduct these reviews.

Of course; we neither wanted to create an undue burden on staff nor
create a system where every registrant faced an annual audit of their
space that would undoubtedly leave ARIN viewed in a similar light to the
IRS.

We hoped that giving staff discretion would allow them to develop a
reasonable internal process for identifying the "low-hanging fruit" to
review without bothering those that were known (or at least strongly
suspected) of not holding unused resources.

> "...usage of any resources maintained in the..."
>
> By definition, abandoned IP resources aren't being "maintained" thus
> they do not fall under this section of the NRPM.  This section only
> applies to resources that are being actively defended.

No, it applies to any resources that ARIN maintains a registration for
in its database.

> Technically, ARIN is within compliance of the NRPM at this time, since
> Section 12 is optional, ...

Yes, they are.  It was our intent and desire that they'd be more active
than they have been, but the policy does unfortunately allow staff to do
absolutely nothing if that's what the ARIN President chooses.  That was
not my intent.  If the activity level doesn't increase in the somewhat
near future, I'll be submitting a proposal to remove the optional
nature, but I hope it doesn't come to that because I think that's almost
as bad as doing nothing.

S

-- 
Stephen Sprunk         "God does not play dice."  --Albert Einstein
CCIE #3723         "God is an inveterate gambler, and He throws the
K5SSS        dice at every possible opportunity." --Stephen Hawking

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature
Size: 3646 bytes
Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20100127/b22b140d/attachment-0001.bin>


More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list