> On Nov 29, 2017, at 22:08 , Ted Mittelstaedt <[email protected]> wrote: > > > And I will point out that the entire point of validating POCs is to discover > things like /16's that haven't been used for 15 years.
I’m not convinced this is true. I think the entire point of validating POCs is to make sure that all resources have valid POCs. I think that if the entire point were discovering /16s that haven’t been used for 15 years, then POC validation would be tied to some process for liberating those resources for reissue. Owen > > It would seem to me that ARIN staff vacillates between loving and hating > section 3.6 of the NRPM. Some years they see any attempt at > housecleaning stale assignments that are just on autopilot (like this > mythical /16 - I love how when people cite these examples they never > state the actual numbers - hello!) as an obstacle to increased IPv6 > adoption so they hate it and undercut it. Other years they desperately > need to get some IPv4 for someone very big and powerful with maybe a > whole lot of guns and rocket launchers and such and they love this > section since it allows them to scrape together some IPv4 for a need. > > Ted > > On 11/27/2017 4:24 PM, Owen DeLong wrote: >> Before we travel too far down this branch of discussion, I’d like to >> point out that fees are not within the realm of ARIN policy debate and >> therefore aren’t really an appropriate topic for this list. >> >> If you’d like to discuss such a fee, there is arin-discuss (open to >> Members/Staff/Board/AC) where fee discussions are appropriate. >> >> Alternatively, there is also the ARIN Consultation and Suggestion >> Process (ACSP) available via the Participate tab on the ARIN web site. >> >> Thanks, >> >> Owen >> >>> On Nov 27, 2017, at 13:08 , Steven Ryerse >>> <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> >>> wrote: >>> >>> I don’t see how you can go back and start charging Legacy holders that >>> obtained their blocks before ARIN was created. You would have to >>> charge big companies like AT&T & IBM and you would have to somehow >>> charge the Dept. of Defense and so forth to make it fair to everyone. >>> Seems like that ship sailed long ago. >>> /Steven Ryerse/ >>> /President/ >>> /100 Ashford Center North, Suite 110, Atlanta, GA 30338/ >>> /770.656.1460 - Cell/ >>> /770.399.9099 - Office/ >>> /770.392.0076 - Fax/ >>> <image001.jpg>℠Eclipse Networks, Inc. >>> ^Conquering Complex Networks ^℠ ^ >>> *From:*ARIN-PPML [mailto:[email protected]]*On Behalf >>> Of*Roberts, Orin >>> *Sent:*Monday, November 27, 2017 3:59 PM >>> *To:*Andrew Bagrin <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> >>> *Cc:*ARIN-PPML List <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> >>> *Subject:*Re: [arin-ppml] Draft Policy ARIN-2017-12: Require New POC >>> Validation Upon Reassignment >>> I see obstacles but increased fees would lead to greater efficiency in >>> IPv4 assignments and usage or at the very least aid in the migration >>> to IPv6. >>> >>> 1. Charging a monthly fee (or higher monthly fee), means increased >>> costs to end-users for whatever services said company provides. >>> 2. ISP’s with VERY LARGE inventory of IPs would lobby against such a >>> proposal. A typical ISP would have several /16’s in reservation - >>> capacity planning. >>> 3. What’s to stop companies from doing what they do now? – Reassign >>> or Reallocate unused inventory (ie trade and monetize via brokers). >>> >>> Orin Roberts >>> *From:*ARIN-PPML [mailto:[email protected]]*On Behalf >>> Of*Andrew Bagrin >>> *Sent:*November-27-17 3:35 PM >>> *To:*Austin Murkland <[email protected] >>> <mailto:[email protected]>>; Andre Dalle <[email protected] >>> <mailto:[email protected]>> >>> *Cc:*ARIN-PPML List <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> >>> *Subject:*Re: [arin-ppml] Draft Policy ARIN-2017-12: Require New POC >>> Validation Upon Reassignment >>> I’d also like to see a $100 monthly fee per IPv4 /24 currently assigned. >>> I held onto a /16 at a previous company, just because it was cool but >>> had no use for it. I checked recently and it is still assigned to the >>> same company and not being used 15 years later. >>> By adding a $25k monthly fee, they would quickly return the block. >>> Currently we have to pay brokers or sellers to acquire more IPv4 >>> space. I would rather pay ARIN which could go to better funding the >>> organization. >>> *From:*ARIN-PPML [mailto:[email protected] >>> <mailto:[email protected]>]*On Behalf Of*Austin Murkland >>> *Sent:*Monday, November 27, 2017 3:26 PM >>> *To:*Andre Dalle <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> >>> *Cc:*ARIN-PPML List <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> >>> *Subject:*Re: [arin-ppml] Draft Policy ARIN-2017-12: Require New POC >>> Validation Upon Reassignment >>> Also support this >>> On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 6:20 PM, Andre Dalle <[email protected] >>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >>> >>> >>> All my IPv4 space is reassigned, and I discovered last year that >>> not all of it - from the same carrier - is properly associated >>> with us. >>> >>> Upstream created a POC for us (even though we were an existing >>> customer with multiple reassignments), and it's been sluggish >>> getting them to >>> sort it out. We have rDNS, so most abuse reporting still finds us, >>> but some abuse mechanisms out there rely on POC info. >>> >>> So I think this is necessary. +100 from here as well. >>> >>> ---- >>> André Dalle >>> Systems Administrator >>> National Capital FreeNet [http://www.ncf.ca <http://www.ncf.ca/>] >>> >>> ----- Original Message ----- >>> From: "Joe Provo" <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> >>> To: "ARIN-PPML List" <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> >>> Sent: Wednesday, 22 November, 2017 11:01:59 >>> Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Draft Policy ARIN-2017-12: Require New >>> POC Validation Upon Reassignment >>> >>> On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 06:13:46PM -0500, David Huberman wrote: >>> > Thank you Scott. As the co-author, I very much recognize this >>> > proposal text is a ???first draft???. Working with my co-author >>> > Jason Schiller, and having solicited feedback from the AC, this >>> > proposal was submitted to solve the general problem. My hope was >>> > the mechanics would be looked at critically by the community during >>> > the PDP, and we would work together to improve them. >>> >>> With my personal hat on I'm very happy to see this getting >>> to discussion. +100 for intent and I look forward to useful >>> language suggestions here. >>> >>> -- >>> Posted from my personal account - see X-Disclaimer header. >>> Joe Provo / Gweep / Earthling >>> _______________________________________________ >>> PPML >>> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to >>> the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List ([email protected] >>> <mailto:[email protected]>). >>> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: >>> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml >>> Please [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>if you >>> experience any issues. >>> _______________________________________________ >>> PPML >>> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to >>> the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List ([email protected] >>> <mailto:[email protected]>). >>> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: >>> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml >>> Please [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>if you >>> experience any issues. >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> PPML >>> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to >>> the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List ([email protected] >>> <mailto:[email protected]>). >>> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: >>> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml >>> Please [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>if you experience >>> any issues. >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> PPML >> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to >> the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List ([email protected]). >> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: >> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml >> Please contact [email protected] if you experience any issues. > _______________________________________________ > PPML > You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to > the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List ([email protected]). > Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: > http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml > Please contact [email protected] if you experience any issues. _______________________________________________ PPML You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List ([email protected]). Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml Please contact [email protected] if you experience any issues.
