[arin-ppml] Draft Proposal for Needs-Free IPv4 Transfers

[Mike Burns]

>Per NRPM 4.1.7  (Section "RFC 2050"):

>"ARIN takes guidance from allocation and assignment policies and procedures 
>set forth in RFC 2050."

>RFC 2050 states: "IP addresses are valid as long as the criteria continues 
>to be met."

>This would indicate that despite the criteria being provided in the
>context  of a new allocation, the actual IP assignment or allocation
>remains "valid as long as the criteria continues to be met".

>(I believe I already answered this question earlier on the mailing list, 
>but
>repeat it here in case it is useful in consideration of the policy 
>proposal)

>Thanks!
>/John


Hi John,

So any violation of RFC2050 is a violation of ARIN policy and could allow a 
revokation under section12?
Does the IETF write ARIN policy?
The NRPM is pretty clear that if you don't pay your ARIN bill, addresses can 
be revoked.
It can be that clear about revokation for failing to maintain the original 
allocation criteria, too.
I'm with Owen, in that this looks like an oversight and should be corrected 
in the NRPM if that's what the community wants.


Regards,

Mike