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

[John Curran]

On 16 Jan 2021, at 3:39 PM, Fernando Frediani <fhfrediani at gmail.com<mailto:fhfrediani at gmail.com>> wrote:

Exactly John, that's why the Board of Trustees or equivalent body has to approve policies that advances from this forum, to make sure they are in line with the applicable law, operational impacts, etc. But the Board has not power to make policies or define rules for allocation of revocation.

Fernando -

That is also incorrect in the ARIN region (“But the Board has not power to make policies or define rules for allocation of revocation.”)  The ARIN Board of Trustees has the full authority of the organization, having been elected by the membership - this includes the ultimate authority to adopt all of ARIN’s number resource policies.  In its deep wisdom, the ARIN Board of Trustees adopted a Policy Development Process that delegates and constrains its role in the normal course of policy development, but that does not change the underlying authority to define the policies by which ARIN operates.

More important to highlight is that any policies regarding allocation of revocation come exclusively from this forum. If this forum defines lack of payment is one of that reasons for revocation of resources and Board approves it according to the PDP, then the Board is free to adjust the RSA and whatever procedures necessary to make it happen.

Again, that is not the case in the ARIN region, and it might be best if you refrain from make assertions regarding the functioning of authority in the ARIN region without further research.  Note - I am also available at any time if you wish to discuss specifics of ARIN authority and operation - feel free to reach out to me to arrange if needed.

What I am saying with is that it is in its prerogatives for this forum to keep in the policy text that lack of payment is a reason for revocation. There is not reason to remove what is in there, it will not cause any harm or conflict to whatever the Board decides the RSA will be.

The policy writeup notes "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)” – this statement is accurate, which suggests that the proposed change to policy text is well-considered.

Thanks,
/John

John Curran
President and CEO
American Registry for Internet Numbers



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20210116/7a2dba10/attachment.htm>