[arin-ppml] ARIN-2019-7: Elimination of the Waiting List (was:Re: Looking for final show of support on revised Advisory Council Recommendation Regarding NRPM 4.1.8. Unmet Requests

[David Farmer]

On Sun, Jun 16, 2019 at 2:50 PM Mueller, Milton L <milton at gatech.edu> wrote:

> OK, I’ve read it, and here is my reaction:
>
>
>
> This policy requires legal comment. ARIN’s Articles and Bylaws do not
> specifically prohibit ARIN from monetizing returned or revoked resources by
> selling those resources into the transfer market
>
>
>
> So point #1 is that this proposed policy does not violate any articles or
> bylaws.
>
>
>
> Today, ARIN does not financially benefit in any material way from such
> revocations. Adoption of this policy would for the first time allow the
> party in a contested revocation situation to argue that ARIN seeks to
> financially benefit. Avoiding that concern is also significant.
>
>
>
> I am totally unimpressed with this argument. If ARIN revokes addresses for
> nonpayment it is financially benefiting from the revocation is it not? It
> is basically taking them back because it is not getting paid.
>
>
>
> If ARIN “gets paid” by selling the numbers into the transfer market what
> is the difference exactly?
>

Referring to the waiting list policy, the Draft Policy says, "this policy
provides valuable number resources essentially for free".

Yes, ARIN currently financially benefits, but currently, that benefit is at
a level of cost recovery, "essentially for free" as stated above. Whereas,
if ARIN were to dispose of resources using the market, the level of
financial benefit is likely to be orders of magnitude larger. Furthermore,
if this wasn't the case, then the impact on the market and the potential
for fraud supposedly created by the waiting list, that the draft policy
proposes to mitigate, wouldn't exist in the first place.

In short, "what is the difference", probably, several orders of magnitude
in the level of financial benefit involved. Where the financial motivations
from simple "cost recovery" can probably be summarily dismissed by the
court. Whereas the potential financial motivations, that one might even
call a windfall, from market-based transactions probably at least needs to
be examined and evaluated by the court, and probably wouldn't be summarily
dismissed. The outcome of the two situations might be the same in the end,
but the level of effort involved defending and the level of risk of an
adverse ruling, are not the same at all.

More generally, ARIN participating in the market seems distasteful and
counter to its overall mission, but doesn't directly violate its Articles
and Bylaws.

That said that doesn't mean ARIN can't implement the policy, but these
risks need to be evaluated when compared to other alternatives being
considered, along with the possible benefits this policy could have as well.

-- 
===============================================
David Farmer               Email:farmer at umn.edu
Networking & Telecommunication Services
Office of Information Technology
University of Minnesota
2218 University Ave SE        Phone: 612-626-0815
Minneapolis, MN 55414-3029   Cell: 612-812-9952
===============================================
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20190617/9d091eec/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image002.png
Type: image/png
Size: 18443 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20190617/9d091eec/attachment.png>