[arin-ppml] Revised - Draft Policy ARIN-2020-8: Clarify and Update 4.2.1.2 Annual Renewal Fee

[David Farmer]

Are you saying fees only apply to ISPs with IPv4, the current text is in
section 4.2.1.4, where section 4.2 applies to Allocations to ISPs...

Furthermore, not paying fees is only one reason resources may be revoked or
reclaimed.

I think the new text is a better way to deal with the issues.

On Fri, Jan 15, 2021 at 17:09 Fernando Frediani <fhfrediani at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Yes fees are most a RSA thing, but I see no harm to keep the actual
> wording as it is and make it loud and clear that organizations that don't
> pay the fees are subjected to resources revocation - which is up to this
> forum to define - so no one may plead ignorance about it.
> What is the problem to keep it as it is ? If the newly proposed text
> mentions that ISPs should take care to ensure that their annual renewal
> payment is made by their anniversary due date, what's wrong to also remind
> them that if that is not fulfilled the resources may be revoked ?
> This makes part of the Fair and Impartial Number Resources Administration
> principle.
>
> I see no propose in this proposal therefore I do not support it.
>
> Regards
> Fernando
> On 15/01/2021 17:55, ARIN wrote:
>
> The following Draft Policy has been revised:
>
>
>
> * ARIN-2020-8: Clarify and Update 4.2.1.2 Annual Renewal Fee
>
>
>
> Revised text is below and can be found at:
>
>
>
> https://www.arin.net/participate/policy/drafts/2020_8/
>
>
>
> You are encouraged to discuss all Draft Policies on PPML. The AC will
> evaluate the discussion in order to assess the conformance of this Draft
> Policy with ARIN's Principles of Internet number resource policy as stated
> in the Policy Development Process (PDP). Specifically, these principles are:
>
>
>
> * Enabling Fair and Impartial Number Resource Administration
>
> * Technically Sound
>
> * Supported by the Community
>
>
>
> The PDP can be found at:
>
> https://www.arin.net/participate/policy/pdp/
>
>
>
> Draft Policies and Proposals under discussion can be found at:
>
> https://www.arin.net/participate/policy/drafts/
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
>
>
> Sean Hopkins
>
> Policy Analyst
>
> American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN)
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Draft Policy ARIN-2020-8: Clarify and Update 4.2.1.2 Annual Renewal Fee
>
>
>
> Problem Statement:
>
>
>
> The January 2020 Policy Experience Report highlighted that the existing
> language in Section 4.2.1.2 "Annual Renewal" references fees. Fees are not
> considered a member qualification criteria. Since fees aren't referenced
> elsewhere in community policy, the wording was reviewed by the PEG.
>
>
>
> Policy statement:
>
>
>
> Given that the Registration Services Agreement (RSA) already contains
> language regarding fees, the AC Shepherds recommend to eliminate 4.2.1.2.
> entirely and add:
>
>
>
> 2.X Registration Services Agreement (RSA)
>
>
>
> Number resources allocated or assigned by ARIN under these policies are
> subject to a contractural agreement between ARIN and the resource holder.
> Throughout this document, any and all forms of this agreement, past or
> future, are simply referred to as the Registration Services Agreement (RSA).
>
>
>
> Comments:
>
>
>
> The AC’s understanding is that community policy should not include
> language referring to fees, as such language is already present in the
> Registration Services Agreement (RSA)
>
>
>
> Registration Services has informed us that "Section 4.2.1.2. contains
> language detailing fee due dates, encouraging on-time payments, and
> mentions potential revocations. It also contains a reference to web
> documentation that has evolved significantly since this policy was
> implemented, and may continue to do so. Essentially the entire section is
> made of language that is already in the Registration Services Agreement,
> and is generally fee-focused, making it outside normal scope for Internet
> number resource policy."
>
>
>
>
>
> Timetable for implementation: Immediate
>
>
>
>
>
> Anything else:
>
>
>
> Community input since adopting draft has informed this direction. The 2.X
> placeholder is used as this seems like it might be foundational enough to
> not be 2.17 but the Shepherds would rather not upset current indexing
> arbitrarily.
>
> _______________________________________________
> ARIN-PPML
> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
> the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML at arin.net).
> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
> Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.
>
> _______________________________________________
> ARIN-PPML
> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
> the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML at arin.net).
> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
> https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
> Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.
>
-- 
===============================================
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/20210115/8d630c1f/attachment.htm>