<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<br>
<div text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF"
style="font-size:13.333333969116211px">
<div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">JS> RFC-2050 3.1 says:<br>
JS><br>
JS> "IP addresses are valid as long as the criteria
continues to be met."</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
</div>
AD> One might construe this statement to directly invalidate
existing legacy allocations </div>
<div text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF"
style="font-size:13.333333969116211px">AD> which would now be
in ARIN's policy through this policy. Others might be worried </div>
<div text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF"
style="font-size:13.333333969116211px">AD> that this opens the
door wider to changing policy to retroactively revoke allocations </div>
<div text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF"
style="font-size:13.333333969116211px"> AD> or assignments by
changing "criteria". Furthermore, I believe this idea is
already </div>
<div text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF"
style="font-size:13.333333969116211px">AD> handled by existing
NRPM text and the RSA.</div>
<div style="font-size:13.333333969116211px"><br>
</div>
<div style="font-size:13.333333969116211px">JS> What should we do
here?<br>
<br>
</div>
Lets consider the negative version of this statement<br>
<br>
"IP addresses are valid as long as the criteria continues to be met"<br>
<br>
One could write it as follows<br>
<br>
"IP addresses are not valid as long as the criteria is not met"<br>
<br>
There are two issues with the current operational practices of the
RIRs and ARIN specifically with regard to this statement in my
opinion.<br>
<br>
1. "the criteria" is not really defined here and thus is open to
interpretation exactly what is intended. One could read this as the
whole policy and that is fine, but it would be better if a statement
of principles actually referenced the "community developed number
resource policy" rather than an obscure reference to it. Is this
the _original_ criteria when the addresses were issued or the
_current_ policy or some other policy at some time period?<br>
<br>
2. ARIN does not "invalidate" IP addresses as soon as the criteria
is not net. ARIN has, in general, only done reclamation in cases of
fraud and lack of payment of registration services fees.<br>
<br>
Consider a very simple case (Yes, there are problems with every
analog)<br>
<br>
ARIN issues an org a /20 who has justified it based on current
policy in the year A. Business cycles happen and the org changes,
it is still in business using its address block, but it could no
longer justify a /20 of address space, it could only justify a /21.
Should ARIN invalidate this org's address block? One could say in
the ideal world maybe, but we don't live in that world. The ARIN
community has thus far not done reclamation for this type of issue
and I believe it would not be in the registry community's best
interest to do it either. <br>
<br>
What "principle" are people hoping to preserve by enshrining this
statement in ARIN's policy. I think some people are trying to say
that if you can't justify the address space any more you shouldn't
have it. While that is probably true in some cases, it may not be
true in all cases and thus we either have to define those cases or
consider if a statement like this should be in a "RIR principles
section". <br>
<br>
Again I suggest one consider my proposed changes in lieu of the
proposed original statements from RFC-2050.<br>
<br>
<blockquote>
<pre wrap="">In order meet the Principles and Goals of the Internet Registry System,
resource holders may be required from time to time to provide an
accounting and current usage of resources currently held. The RIRs
shall set policies to define these accounting mythologies as part of
their community driven policy process.</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
One might also consider a rewrite of the RFC-2050 statement as well
adding it to the above two sentences.<br>
<tt><br>
</tt>
<blockquote><tt>IP number resources are valid as long as an
organization continues to comply with the terms of the community
developed number resource policy and any registration services
agreements between the organization and the RIR.</tt><br>
</blockquote>
<br>
Andrew<br>
<br>
</body>
</html>