[arin-ppml] fee structure
jcurran at arin.net
Fri Mar 29 13:40:37 EDT 2013
On Mar 29, 2013, at 12:48 PM, Matthew Kaufman <matthew at matthew.at> wrote:
> Personally, I'd be more than happy to have my resource listings (all of them legacy) removed from the ARIN registry, as long as all of the RIRs can promise to not allocate the same numbers to someone else. Then I could publish my own listing of who is using those resources, or band together with other legacy holders to do so in a coordinated fashion, and not be bound by ARIN policy when I decide to change those listings.
You are actually discussing the structure of a _single_ registry system
(it needs to be a single coordinated registry system to keep numbers unique)
which is known as the Internet Registry System and was originally documented
in RFC 2050.
You can find more details on its present structure and processes for adding
registries in ICANN ICP-2: <http://www.icann.org/en/resources/policy/global-addressing/new-rirs-criteria>
but that does not cover ad-hoc or non-geographic registries as you outlined,
and would be change which affects on parties other than just yourself (i.e.
ISPs, law enforcement, network abuse desks, geolocation providers, etc.)
I imagine that there are many other possible models that could be considered
(such as registries with overlapping service areas, registry/registrar split
models, etc.) but it would take consensus on a specific global policy to
change the existing structure. Some of these topics regarding the structure
of the Internet Registry system came up at the ICANN meeting in Toronto; I am
not aware if there are any follow-up activities planned for future meetings.
President and CEO
More information about the ARIN-PPML