What triggered ARIN ?

[Jim Fleming]

On Monday, March 03, 1997 4:54 PM, John Curran[SMTP:jcurran at bbnplanet.com] wrote:
@ Jim - Excessive crossposting.  Please refer folks to one list
@ to carry on a discussion, rather than running one discussion
@ across three lists simultaneously.  I've replied to the naipr 
@ list for sake of simplicity.
@ 

Thank you for replying...

@ >At 9:52 3/3/97, Jim Fleming wrote:
@ >
@ >Can the people promoting ARIN including the ISP/C clarify
@ >some of the following questions ?
@ >
@ >1. What triggered the sudden need for ARIN ?
@ 
@     I believe ARIN is the result of planning for graceful
@     transition of IP registration services from the InterNIC
@     prior to the expiration of the current agreeement.  One
@     might be able to claim that it is still early to start 
@     on this activity, but it is far better to be too early
@     than too late.  
@ 

Yes, I imagine everyone wants to plan for the transition.
It is in everyone's best interest:

	NSF - Needs to focus on R&E not running registries
		which require business operations, clerical
		support, etc. This not only holds for the
		.COM, .NET, .ORG InterNIC but also the
		.US domain. (see below)

	NSI - Has some unique business opportunities
		that it has enjoyed. It may have even more
		unique opportunities if it was free to enter
		the TLD arena that is shaping up.

	SAIC - Probably wants to focus on DOD contracts.
		There may always be more money there
		than in domain names and IP addresses.

	IANA/USC/ISI - Needs to focus on R&E not running
		the .US registry and not running interference
		between the various business communities.

	ISPs - More Top Level Domain registries will give
		the ISPs more choices and their customers
		will enjoy a more diverse Internet.

	NEW Root Name Server Confederations - These groups
		of commercially supported TRUE Root Name
		Servers help to provide the ISPs with the
		stability they need and accurate information.
		They are strictly operational in their nature.
		(Examples: InterNIC, eDNS, ...)
	
	NEW Registry Authorities (RA) - These commercial
		entities need to provide a layer of glue
		between the TLD registries and the Root Name
		Server Confederations. This allows TLD registries
		to work with several confederations and
		insulates the Root Name Server operators
		from the decisions and details of the changing
		TLD Registry Industry.
		(Examples: IANA, IAHC, AlterNIC, ...)

	NEW TLD Registries - These commercial and
		non-commercial organizations provide ISPs
		and end users with a place to register
		Second Level Domains (SLDs). They
		depend on the RAs to coordinate with
		the Root Name Server Confederations
		to keep the infratstructure together.
		(Examples: .COM, .US, .WEB, ...)

These last THREE entities are once again part of
a three-way structure that holds everything together.

A similar three-way structure was created when the
InterNIC was created. That structure consists of
IS, DS, and RS. In my opinion, ARIN breaks that
structure. I would rather see the structure CLONED
not fragmented.

ARIN could easily CLONE the structure by working
on a plan that dove-tails more closely with the
rest of the industry.

No one disagrees a transition plan is needed and that
is why some of us have been working on these plans
almost full-time for over one year. I will not go into
detail, but I will never forget the conversations I had
with people at the NSF when they said, "we hope
you people figure out a way to get us out of here...".

The NSF has been saying this for some time. What
I do not understand is why the ARIN proposal was
not brought up in all the other forums where people
are working hard to "get the NSF" out of the picture
before September 1998.

Why haven't the people launching ARIN explained
the meetings reported in the Internet Monthly Reports?

Why are these open forums only used AFTER everything
is a "done deal"...?
	
@     It's also important to note that the current costs of 
@     IP registration services are being offset by the fees
@     for DNS registration activities due to the combined 
@     nature of the current operation (if I understand the 
@     situation correctly) and that this situation may change
@     dramatically with the emergence of new TLD registries.
@ 
@ >2. Has internal funding been removed or not ?
@ 
@     See above.   I don't believe that any of the Int. Inf.
@     Fund is being distributed, either to IP registry services
@     or any other purpose, since there is a requirement to 
@     establish a fairly independent process for disbursement.
@ 

By internal funding I did not mean the Intellectual Infrastructure
Fund. By internal funding I meant the money flowing from
domain registrations to the various IS, DS, RS activities.

IP registration services mostly fall under RS. I do not
understand how one small part of RS can be magically
without funding.

The InterNIC is supposed to be a "Cooperative Agreement".
The cooperation is between IS, DS, and RS. For some
reason, the domain name fees seem to be mostly attributed
to RS. This is not the case, because people working in IS
functions are clearly being paid by domain name fees.

I suppose AT&T, the contractor for DS, is not being paid
because they can handle DS out of petty cash. This is
a problem when you get IS, DS, RS contractors of different
size. One company needs the money to survive and the
other lets them have it. When the total organization grows
there may be no plan for funding all aspects of IS, DS and RS.

Now, if a part of RS pops up and claims they have no funding
then it is incumbent on the managers, in this case the NSF,
to find out why the funds flowing into the IS, DS, RS "coop"
are not covering the entire coop.

@ >3. Is ARIN going to be funded from the Intellectual Intrastructure Fund ?
@ 
@     In order to receive funding, there needs to be a process
@     for applying for such funds.  To my knowledge that process
@     does not exist today, but that doesn't mean it won't be 
@     in place sometime soon.  
@ 

I assume the NSF is evaluating the various options.

Again, I suggest that they use the fund to CLONE
50 InterNICs, one for each State in the U.S. They
can start doing this and there will be more than
enough "NICs" in place before September 1998
to effect a smooth transition.
 
@     Once there is a way to get at this fund, the next question
@     is whether it would be an appropriate use of such monies. 
@     In my personal opinion (and it's quite likely that other
@     ARIN trustees feel differently), I would prefer to see 
@     IP allocation services provided on a cost-recovery basis
@     without any subsidy.  This is similiar in nature to the 
@     other regional IP registries and avoids creating a strange
@     motivation for folks in other regions to use ARIN...
@ 

I would prefer to see the IS, DS, RS cooperative structure
used to allow various revenues (domain names, IP addresses, etc.)
to find their true equilibrium points. This will allow for many
InterNIC clones to appear to serve the public.

If ARIN is isolated and has ANOTHER monopoly,
then the IP charges become artificial numbers.

If you would like to discuss 50 ARINs, one in each State,
then you might have a chance to find the true market value
of IP addresses. Unfortunately, some people feel that
50 ARINs could not all stand on their own that there is
not enough revenue to support that many.

@     Having said that I'm generally against using such funds 
@     for ARIN, I will contradict myself to some extent by 
@     suggesting that it might be perfectly reasonable for 
@     ARIN to seek some funding to operate during its initial
@     phase (when members are few and startup costs are high).
@ 

Again, I suggest that companies with large IP
allocations, like BBN Planet, help fund an ARIN-like
service to see how the market responds. It is called
a "market trial" by some companies.

--
Jim Fleming
Unir Corporation

e-mail:
JimFleming at unety.net
JimFleming at unety.s0.g0 (EDNS/IPv8)