[arin-ppml] Reclamation of Number Resources

[Ronald F. Guilmette]

In message <7F1C6797-F050-4424-A26A-385B14A0E2AE at arin.net>, 
John Curran <jcurran at arin.net> wrote:

>       *)  Violation(s) of out-of-region usage policy.
>
>
>Such has not to my knowledge (and quite unlikely to occur, as "ARIN registered
>resources may be used outside the ARIN service region."
><https://www.arin.net/participate/policy/nrpm/#9-out-of-region-use>

Thank you John.

I just want to be sure that I am clear on this point.  The relevant section
of the NRPM, which you linked to, states:

    "Out of region use of ARIN registered resources are valid justification
    for additional number resources, provided that the applicant has a real
    and substantial connection with the ARIN region which applicant must
    prove (as described below) ..."

    "A real and substantial connection shall be defined as carrying on
    business in the ARIN region in a meaningful manner."

(A lengthy list of possible means of demonstrating exactly such a "substantial
connection" to the region is then elaborated.)

The above, together with your statement, leaves me with two questions:

    1)  The NRPM Section 9 verbiage I have quoted above is explicit in placing
        a restriction upon ARIN, apparently prohibiting it from assigning
        "additional number resources" to applicants that lack "a real and
        substantial {and provable} connection with the ARIN region".

        Perhaps I am just reading too much into this, but the way in which
        this section of the NRPM is worded certainly appears to give license
        to ARIN to provide *initial* assignments/allocations of number
        resources to parties or entities that entirely lack any real,
        substantial, and/or provable connection with the ARIN region, and
        that the NRPM policy, as written, only prohibits ARIN from provding
        resources to entities or parties which have no substantial connection
        to the region AND that are coming back for "additional" resources,
        presumably after they have already been assigned some such by ARIN.

        Am I reading that right and is that your interpretation also?

    2)  Am I to understand that in the entire history of ARIN, or at least
        in the entire history of the above-quoted in-region "substantial
        connection" requirement, there have actually been a grand total of
        zero instances in which any party or entity had their ARIN resources
        reclaimed on the basis that the party or entity in question was found
        to have no substantial connection to the region?

As should be apparent, this latter point/question may have some relevance to
the ongoing controversies wthin the AFRINIC region.

If other regions are not enforcing any of their own written geography-based
policies then that fact alone would seem to make the argument that AFRINIC
should follow suit, and should not do so either, at least somewhat more
logically defensible.


Regards,
rfg