Mailing List Archive

Re: [External] Normal ARIN registration service fees for LRSA entrants after 31 Dec 2023 (was: Fwd: [arin-announce] Availability of the Legacy Fee Cap for New LRSA Entrants Ending as of 31 December 2023)
On 15 Sep 2022, at 9:29 PM, Tom Krenn via NANOG <nanog@nanog.org<mailto:nanog@nanog.org>> wrote:

An interesting idea, but like others have said I think the ship may have sailed for RPKI. Really I have no problem with the ARIN fees. They are a drop in the bucket for most network budgets. In fact as a legacy holder I would gladly pay the same as an RIR-allocated resource holder if it would allow the use of the more advanced services. It's the ownership question and RSA/LRSA language that throws the wrench in everything.

As John said " I will note that ARIN’s approach is the result of aiming for a different target – that more specifically being the lowest possible fees administered on an equitable basis for _all resource holders_ in the region.". If that's the goal, give us the option to pay the same without all the legal mess around signing the RSA/LRSA. I'm sure that's what has been holding some organizations back for the couple decades mentioned. It has been the major stumbling point for a few of the ones I've been part of over the years.

Tom -

Over the years, ARIN has made several revisions to the RSA/LRSA to make it both clearer and more customer friendly,
and the most recent version (announced earlier this week - <https://www.arin.net/announcements/20220912/>) strikes
much of the language in section 7 that some legal teams had objection to… It is likely not everything you want, but I
would suggest taking a fresh look at it as it was substantially reduced specifically to address the most cited customer
concern regarding the legal obligations in the prior version of the RSA/LRSA.

FYI,
/John

John Curran
President and CEO
American Registry for Internet Numbers
RE: [External] Normal ARIN registration service fees for LRSA entrants after 31 Dec 2023 (was: Fwd: [arin-announce] Availability of the Legacy Fee Cap for New LRSA Entrants Ending as of 31 December 2023) [ In reply to ]
Thanks John! I've been working on this with our attorneys for almost a year. I did send over the revisions and it will be good to see what they say. But I'm not sure it will be enough to reduce the perceived risk. Has ARIN considered separating the fee structure and service goals from the drive to get everyone under an RSA?

Tom Krenn
Network Architect
Enterprise Architecture - Information Technology
[Hennepin County logo]


From: John Curran <jcurran@arin.net>
Sent: Thursday, September 15, 2022 8:42 PM
To: Tom Krenn <Tom.Krenn@hennepin.us>
Cc: Rubens Kuhl <rubensk@gmail.com>; North American Network Operators' Group <nanog@nanog.org>
Subject: Re: [External] Normal ARIN registration service fees for LRSA entrants after 31 Dec 2023 (was: Fwd: [arin-announce] Availability of the Legacy Fee Cap for New LRSA Entrants Ending as of 31 December 2023)



On 15 Sep 2022, at 9:29 PM, Tom Krenn via NANOG <nanog@nanog.org<mailto:nanog@nanog.org>> wrote:

An interesting idea, but like others have said I think the ship may have sailed for RPKI. Really I have no problem with the ARIN fees. They are a drop in the bucket for most network budgets. In fact as a legacy holder I would gladly pay the same as an RIR-allocated resource holder if it would allow the use of the more advanced services. It's the ownership question and RSA/LRSA language that throws the wrench in everything.

As John said " I will note that ARIN's approach is the result of aiming for a different target - that more specifically being the lowest possible fees administered on an equitable basis for _all resource holders_ in the region.". If that's the goal, give us the option to pay the same without all the legal mess around signing the RSA/LRSA. I'm sure that's what has been holding some organizations back for the couple decades mentioned. It has been the major stumbling point for a few of the ones I've been part of over the years.

Tom -

Over the years, ARIN has made several revisions to the RSA/LRSA to make it both clearer and more customer friendly,
and the most recent version (announced earlier this week - <https://www.arin.net/announcements/20220912/<https://gcc02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.arin.net%2Fannouncements%2F20220912%2F&data=05%7C01%7CTom.Krenn%40hennepin.us%7C970ff4a0fade4b7b0d3308da9784b663%7C8aefdf9f878046bf8fb74c924653a8be%7C0%7C0%7C637988893501824755%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=nbnXoX6%2BXkkwKC6sbxokXipFpmdFq8839TvtK0F4SNY%3D&reserved=0>>) strikes
much of the language in section 7 that some legal teams had objection to... It is likely not everything you want, but I
would suggest taking a fresh look at it as it was substantially reduced specifically to address the most cited customer
concern regarding the legal obligations in the prior version of the RSA/LRSA.

FYI,
/John

John Curran
President and CEO
American Registry for Internet Numbers




Disclaimer: If you are not the intended recipient of this message, please immediately notify the sender of the transmission error and then promptly permanently delete this message from your computer system.
Re: [External] Normal ARIN registration service fees for LRSA entrants after 31 Dec 2023 (was: Fwd: [arin-announce] Availability of the Legacy Fee Cap for New LRSA Entrants Ending as of 31 December 2023) [ In reply to ]
Tom -

It’s an artifact of our formation that we are presently providing services to any customers absent any agreement
and while ARIN continues to do so (by providing basic services to legacy customers), the long-term direction is
to provide the same services to all customers under the same agreement and fees – anything else wouldn’t be
equitable.

(This is the direction that the ARIN Board of Trustees has set based on community input; I will note that
the ARIN Board is itself elected by the community and that we have our annual election upcoming –
https://www.arin.net/announcements/20220906-arinslate/ )

FYI,
/John

John Curran
President and CEO
American Registry for Internet Numbers


On 16 Sep 2022, at 9:55 AM, Tom Krenn via NANOG <nanog@nanog.org<mailto:nanog@nanog.org>> wrote:

Thanks John! I’ve been working on this with our attorneys for almost a year. I did send over the revisions and it will be good to see what they say. But I’m not sure it will be enough to reduce the perceived risk. Has ARIN considered separating the fee structure and service goals from the drive to get everyone under an RSA?

Tom Krenn
Network Architect
Enterprise Architecture - Information Technology



From: John Curran <jcurran@arin.net<mailto:jcurran@arin.net>>
Sent: Thursday, September 15, 2022 8:42 PM
To: Tom Krenn <Tom.Krenn@hennepin.us<mailto:Tom.Krenn@hennepin.us>>
Cc: Rubens Kuhl <rubensk@gmail.com<mailto:rubensk@gmail.com>>; North American Network Operators' Group <nanog@nanog.org<mailto:nanog@nanog.org>>
Subject: Re: [External] Normal ARIN registration service fees for LRSA entrants after 31 Dec 2023 (was: Fwd: [arin-announce] Availability of the Legacy Fee Cap for New LRSA Entrants Ending as of 31 December 2023)



On 15 Sep 2022, at 9:29 PM, Tom Krenn via NANOG <nanog@nanog.org<mailto:nanog@nanog.org>> wrote:

An interesting idea, but like others have said I think the ship may have sailed for RPKI. Really I have no problem with the ARIN fees. They are a drop in the bucket for most network budgets. In fact as a legacy holder I would gladly pay the same as an RIR-allocated resource holder if it would allow the use of the more advanced services. It's the ownership question and RSA/LRSA language that throws the wrench in everything.

As John said " I will note that ARIN’s approach is the result of aiming for a different target – that more specifically being the lowest possible fees administered on an equitable basis for _all resource holders_ in the region.". If that's the goal, give us the option to pay the same without all the legal mess around signing the RSA/LRSA. I'm sure that's what has been holding some organizations back for the couple decades mentioned. It has been the major stumbling point for a few of the ones I've been part of over the years.

Tom -

Over the years, ARIN has made several revisions to the RSA/LRSA to make it both clearer and more customer friendly,
and the most recent version (announced earlier this week - <https://www.arin.net/announcements/20220912/<https://gcc02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.arin.net%2Fannouncements%2F20220912%2F&data=05%7C01%7CTom.Krenn%40hennepin.us%7C970ff4a0fade4b7b0d3308da9784b663%7C8aefdf9f878046bf8fb74c924653a8be%7C0%7C0%7C637988893501824755%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=nbnXoX6%2BXkkwKC6sbxokXipFpmdFq8839TvtK0F4SNY%3D&reserved=0>>) strikes
much of the language in section 7 that some legal teams had objection to… It is likely not everything you want, but I
would suggest taking a fresh look at it as it was substantially reduced specifically to address the most cited customer
concern regarding the legal obligations in the prior version of the RSA/LRSA.

FYI,
/John

John Curran
President and CEO
American Registry for Internet Numbers




Disclaimer: If you are not the intended recipient of this message, please immediately notify the sender of the transmission error and then promptly permanently delete this message from your computer system.
Re: [External] Normal ARIN registration service fees for LRSA entrants after 31 Dec 2023 (was: Fwd: [arin-announce] Availability of the Legacy Fee Cap for New LRSA Entrants Ending as of 31 December 2023) [ In reply to ]
On Fri, Sep 16, 2022, 8:55 AM John Curran <jcurran@arin.net> wrote:

> Tom -
>
> It’s an artifact of our formation that we are presently providing services
> to any customers absent any agreement
> and while ARIN continues to do so (by providing basic services to legacy
> customers), the long-term direction is
> to provide the same services to all customers under the same agreement and
> fees – anything else wouldn’t be
> equitable.
>
> (This is the direction that the ARIN Board of Trustees has set based on
> community input; I will note that
> the ARIN Board is itself elected by the community and that we have our
> annual election upcoming –
>

Unless the rules have changed, this statement is incorrect.

The board is not elected by the community, it is elected by ARIN customers
who pay for the privilege to vote.

Even though I pay significant money to ARIN I am not allowed to vote, but
as far as I know, I am a part of the community.

https://www.arin.net/announcements/20220906-arinslate/ )
>
> FYI,
> /John
>
> John Curran
> President and CEO
> American Registry for Internet Numbers
>
>
> On 16 Sep 2022, at 9:55 AM, Tom Krenn via NANOG <nanog@nanog.org> wrote:
>
> Thanks John! I’ve been working on this with our attorneys for almost a
> year. I did send over the revisions and it will be good to see what they
> say. But I’m not sure it will be enough to reduce the perceived risk. Has
> ARIN considered separating the fee structure and service goals from the
> drive to get everyone under an RSA?
>
> Tom Krenn
>
> Network Architect
>
> Enterprise Architecture - Information Technology
>
> *From:* John Curran <jcurran@arin.net>
> *Sent:* Thursday, September 15, 2022 8:42 PM
> *To:* Tom Krenn <Tom.Krenn@hennepin.us>
> *Cc:* Rubens Kuhl <rubensk@gmail.com>; North American Network Operators'
> Group <nanog@nanog.org>
> *Subject:* Re: [External] Normal ARIN registration service fees for LRSA
> entrants after 31 Dec 2023 (was: Fwd: [arin-announce] Availability of the
> Legacy Fee Cap for New LRSA Entrants Ending as of 31 December 2023)
>
>
>
> On 15 Sep 2022, at 9:29 PM, Tom Krenn via NANOG <nanog@nanog.org> wrote:
>
> An interesting idea, but like others have said I think the ship may have
> sailed for RPKI. Really I have no problem with the ARIN fees. They are a
> drop in the bucket for most network budgets. In fact as a legacy holder I
> would gladly pay the same as an RIR-allocated resource holder if it would
> allow the use of the more advanced services. It's the ownership question
> and RSA/LRSA language that throws the wrench in everything.
>
> As John said " I will note that ARIN’s approach is the result of aiming
> for a different target – that more specifically being the lowest possible
> fees administered on an equitable basis for _all resource holders_ in the
> region.". If that's the goal, give us the option to pay the same without
> all the legal mess around signing the RSA/LRSA. I'm sure that's what has
> been holding some organizations back for the couple decades mentioned. It
> has been the major stumbling point for a few of the ones I've been part of
> over the years.
>
>
> Tom -
>
> Over the years, ARIN has made several revisions to the RSA/LRSA to make it
> both clearer and more customer friendly,
> and the most recent version (announced earlier this week - <
> https://www.arin.net/announcements/20220912/
> <https://gcc02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.arin.net%2Fannouncements%2F20220912%2F&data=05%7C01%7CTom.Krenn%40hennepin.us%7C970ff4a0fade4b7b0d3308da9784b663%7C8aefdf9f878046bf8fb74c924653a8be%7C0%7C0%7C637988893501824755%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=nbnXoX6%2BXkkwKC6sbxokXipFpmdFq8839TvtK0F4SNY%3D&reserved=0>>)
> strikes
> much of the language in section 7 that some legal teams had objection to…
> It is likely not everything you want, but I
> would suggest taking a fresh look at it as it was substantially reduced
> specifically to address the most cited customer
> concern regarding the legal obligations in the prior version of the
> RSA/LRSA.
>
> FYI,
> /John
>
> John Curran
> President and CEO
> American Registry for Internet Numbers
>
>
>
>
> *Disclaimer:* If you are not the intended recipient of this message,
> please immediately notify the sender of the transmission error and then
> promptly permanently delete this message from your computer system.
>
>
>
Re: [External] Normal ARIN registration service fees for LRSA entrants after 31 Dec 2023 (was: Fwd: [arin-announce] Availability of the Legacy Fee Cap for New LRSA Entrants Ending as of 31 December 2023) [ In reply to ]
John,

In the interest of routing security, when you say ‘basic services’ would ARIN consider offering resource holders who did not sign an (L)RSA the ability to run their own RPKI CA, i.e. you offer them a resource certificate and nothing else, much like what NIC.br currently does in Brazil.

Regards,

-Alex

> On 16 Sep 2022, at 17:53, John Curran <jcurran@arin.net> wrote:
>
> Tom -
>
> It’s an artifact of our formation that we are presently providing services to any customers absent any agreement
> and while ARIN continues to do so (by providing basic services to legacy customers), the long-term direction is
> to provide the same services to all customers under the same agreement and fees – anything else wouldn’t be
> equitable.
>
> (This is the direction that the ARIN Board of Trustees has set based on community input; I will note that
> the ARIN Board is itself elected by the community and that we have our annual election upcoming –
> https://www.arin.net/announcements/20220906-arinslate/ )
>
> FYI,
> /John
>
> John Curran
> President and CEO
> American Registry for Internet Numbers
>
>
>> On 16 Sep 2022, at 9:55 AM, Tom Krenn via NANOG <nanog@nanog.org> wrote:
>>
>> Thanks John! I’ve been working on this with our attorneys for almost a year. I did send over the revisions and it will be good to see what they say. But I’m not sure it will be enough to reduce the perceived risk. Has ARIN considered separating the fee structure and service goals from the drive to get everyone under an RSA?
>>
>> Tom Krenn
>> Network Architect
>> Enterprise Architecture - Information Technology
>>
>> From: John Curran <jcurran@arin.net>
>> Sent: Thursday, September 15, 2022 8:42 PM
>> To: Tom Krenn <Tom.Krenn@hennepin.us>
>> Cc: Rubens Kuhl <rubensk@gmail.com>; North American Network Operators' Group <nanog@nanog.org>
>> Subject: Re: [External] Normal ARIN registration service fees for LRSA entrants after 31 Dec 2023 (was: Fwd: [arin-announce] Availability of the Legacy Fee Cap for New LRSA Entrants Ending as of 31 December 2023)
>>
>>
>>
>> On 15 Sep 2022, at 9:29 PM, Tom Krenn via NANOG <nanog@nanog.org> wrote:
>>
>> An interesting idea, but like others have said I think the ship may have sailed for RPKI. Really I have no problem with the ARIN fees. They are a drop in the bucket for most network budgets. In fact as a legacy holder I would gladly pay the same as an RIR-allocated resource holder if it would allow the use of the more advanced services. It's the ownership question and RSA/LRSA language that throws the wrench in everything.
>>
>> As John said " I will note that ARIN’s approach is the result of aiming for a different target – that more specifically being the lowest possible fees administered on an equitable basis for _all resource holders_ in the region.". If that's the goal, give us the option to pay the same without all the legal mess around signing the RSA/LRSA. I'm sure that's what has been holding some organizations back for the couple decades mentioned. It has been the major stumbling point for a few of the ones I've been part of over the years.
>>
>> Tom -
>>
>> Over the years, ARIN has made several revisions to the RSA/LRSA to make it both clearer and more customer friendly,
>> and the most recent version (announced earlier this week - <https://www.arin.net/announcements/20220912/>) strikes
>> much of the language in section 7 that some legal teams had objection to… It is likely not everything you want, but I
>> would suggest taking a fresh look at it as it was substantially reduced specifically to address the most cited customer
>> concern regarding the legal obligations in the prior version of the RSA/LRSA.
>>
>> FYI,
>> /John
>>
>> John Curran
>> President and CEO
>> American Registry for Internet Numbers
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Disclaimer: If you are not the intended recipient of this message, please immediately notify the sender of the transmission error and then promptly permanently delete this message from your computer system.
>
Re: [External] Normal ARIN registration service fees for LRSA entrants after 31 Dec 2023 (was: Fwd: [arin-announce] Availability of the Legacy Fee Cap for New LRSA Entrants Ending as of 31 December 2023) [ In reply to ]
On 16 Sep 2022, at 12:09 PM, Steve Noble <snoble@sonn.com<mailto:snoble@sonn.com>> wrote:

(This is the direction that the ARIN Board of Trustees has set based on community input; I will note that
the ARIN Board is itself elected by the community and that we have our annual election upcoming –

Unless the rules have changed, this statement is incorrect.

The board is not elected by the community, it is elected by ARIN customers who pay for the privilege to vote.

Even though I pay significant money to ARIN I am not allowed to vote, but as far as I know, I am a part of the community.

Steve -

If you have IPv4 or IPv6 resources under an RSA/LRSA, then you are an ARIN service member.

ARIN service members in good standing can (via ARIN online or by contacting the RSD helpdesk) opt
to become ARIN general members and participate in ARIN governance – this includes agreeing to be
included on the ARIN member list, assigning a voting contact for your organization, and participating in
ARIN elections.

See more information here - https://www.arin.net/participate/oversight/membership/explained/

Thanks,
/John

John Curran
President and CEO
American Registry for Internet Numbers
Re: [External] Normal ARIN registration service fees for LRSA entrants after 31 Dec 2023 (was: Fwd: [arin-announce] Availability of the Legacy Fee Cap for New LRSA Entrants Ending as of 31 December 2023) [ In reply to ]
Alex -

We only provide certification services to resource holders who have a registration services agreement with ARIN.

Thanks,
/John

John Curran
President and CEO
American Registry for Internet Numbers

> On 16 Sep 2022, at 12:21 PM, Alex Band <alex@nlnetlabs.nl> wrote:
>
> John,
>
> In the interest of routing security, when you say ‘basic services’ would ARIN consider offering resource holders who did not sign an (L)RSA the ability to run their own RPKI CA, i.e. you offer them a resource certificate and nothing else, much like what NIC.br currently does in Brazil.
>
> Regards,
>
> -Alex
>
>> On 16 Sep 2022, at 17:53, John Curran <jcurran@arin.net> wrote:
>>
>> Tom -
>>
>> It’s an artifact of our formation that we are presently providing services to any customers absent any agreement
>> and while ARIN continues to do so (by providing basic services to legacy customers), the long-term direction is
>> to provide the same services to all customers under the same agreement and fees – anything else wouldn’t be
>> equitable.
>>
>> (This is the direction that the ARIN Board of Trustees has set based on community input; I will note that
>> the ARIN Board is itself elected by the community and that we have our annual election upcoming –
>> https://www.arin.net/announcements/20220906-arinslate/ )
>>
>> FYI,
>> /John
>>
>> John Curran
>> President and CEO
>> American Registry for Internet Numbers
>>
>>
>>> On 16 Sep 2022, at 9:55 AM, Tom Krenn via NANOG <nanog@nanog.org> wrote:
>>>
>>> Thanks John! I’ve been working on this with our attorneys for almost a year. I did send over the revisions and it will be good to see what they say. But I’m not sure it will be enough to reduce the perceived risk. Has ARIN considered separating the fee structure and service goals from the drive to get everyone under an RSA?
>>>
>>> Tom Krenn
>>> Network Architect
>>> Enterprise Architecture - Information Technology
>>>
>>> From: John Curran <jcurran@arin.net>
>>> Sent: Thursday, September 15, 2022 8:42 PM
>>> To: Tom Krenn <Tom.Krenn@hennepin.us>
>>> Cc: Rubens Kuhl <rubensk@gmail.com>; North American Network Operators' Group <nanog@nanog.org>
>>> Subject: Re: [External] Normal ARIN registration service fees for LRSA entrants after 31 Dec 2023 (was: Fwd: [arin-announce] Availability of the Legacy Fee Cap for New LRSA Entrants Ending as of 31 December 2023)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 15 Sep 2022, at 9:29 PM, Tom Krenn via NANOG <nanog@nanog.org> wrote:
>>>
>>> An interesting idea, but like others have said I think the ship may have sailed for RPKI. Really I have no problem with the ARIN fees. They are a drop in the bucket for most network budgets. In fact as a legacy holder I would gladly pay the same as an RIR-allocated resource holder if it would allow the use of the more advanced services. It's the ownership question and RSA/LRSA language that throws the wrench in everything.
>>>
>>> As John said " I will note that ARIN’s approach is the result of aiming for a different target – that more specifically being the lowest possible fees administered on an equitable basis for _all resource holders_ in the region.". If that's the goal, give us the option to pay the same without all the legal mess around signing the RSA/LRSA. I'm sure that's what has been holding some organizations back for the couple decades mentioned. It has been the major stumbling point for a few of the ones I've been part of over the years.
>>>
>>> Tom -
>>>
>>> Over the years, ARIN has made several revisions to the RSA/LRSA to make it both clearer and more customer friendly,
>>> and the most recent version (announced earlier this week - <https://www.arin.net/announcements/20220912/>) strikes
>>> much of the language in section 7 that some legal teams had objection to… It is likely not everything you want, but I
>>> would suggest taking a fresh look at it as it was substantially reduced specifically to address the most cited customer
>>> concern regarding the legal obligations in the prior version of the RSA/LRSA.
>>>
>>> FYI,
>>> /John
>>>
>>> John Curran
>>> President and CEO
>>> American Registry for Internet Numbers
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Disclaimer: If you are not the intended recipient of this message, please immediately notify the sender of the transmission error and then promptly permanently delete this message from your computer system.
>>
>
Re: [External] Normal ARIN registration service fees for LRSA entrants after 31 Dec 2023 (was: Fwd: [arin-announce] Availability of the Legacy Fee Cap for New LRSA Entrants Ending as of 31 December 2023) [ In reply to ]
On Fri, Sep 16, 2022, 9:23 AM John Curran <jcurran@arin.net> wrote:

>
> On 16 Sep 2022, at 12:09 PM, Steve Noble <snoble@sonn.com> wrote:
>
> (This is the direction that the ARIN Board of Trustees has set based on
>> community input; I will note that
>> the ARIN Board is itself elected by the community and that we have our
>> annual election upcoming –
>>
>
> Unless the rules have changed, this statement is incorrect.
>
> The board is not elected by the community, it is elected by ARIN customers
> who pay for the privilege to vote.
>
> Even though I pay significant money to ARIN I am not allowed to vote, but
> as far as I know, I am a part of the community.
>
>
> Steve -
>
> If you have IPv4 or IPv6 resources under an RSA/LRSA, then you are an ARIN
> service member.
>
> ARIN service members in good standing can (via ARIN online or by
> contacting the RSD helpdesk) opt
> to become ARIN general members and participate in ARIN governance – this
> includes agreeing to be
> included on the ARIN member list, assigning a voting contact for your
> organization, and participating in
> ARIN elections.
>

Hi John,

My point was that you said community, not general members. I understand
that I am blocked from voting because I don't pay enough.


> See more information here -
> https://www.arin.net/participate/oversight/membership/explained/
>
> Thanks,
> /John
>
> John Curran
> President and CEO
> American Registry for Internet Numbers
>
>
Re: [External] Normal ARIN registration service fees for LRSA entrants after 31 Dec 2023 (was: Fwd: [arin-announce] Availability of the Legacy Fee Cap for New LRSA Entrants Ending as of 31 December 2023) [ In reply to ]
On Fri, Sep 16, 2022 at 9:09 AM Steve Noble <snoble@sonn.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 16, 2022, 8:55 AM John Curran <jcurran@arin.net> wrote:
>> It’s an artifact of our formation that we are presently providing services to any customers absent any agreement
>> and while ARIN continues to do so (by providing basic services to legacy customers), the long-term direction is
>> to provide the same services to all customers under the same agreement and fees – anything else wouldn’t be
>> equitable.
>>
>> (This is the direction that the ARIN Board of Trustees has set based on community input; I will note that
>> the ARIN Board is itself elected by the community and that we have our annual election upcoming –
>
>
> Unless the rules have changed, this statement is incorrect.
>
> The board is not elected by the community, it is elected by ARIN customers who pay for the privilege to vote.
>
> Even though I pay significant money to ARIN I am not allowed to vote, but as far as I know, I am a part of the community.

Hi Steve,

Actually, the rules HAVE changed. Under the new fee schedule, every
payer except AS-only payers are eligible to vote. ARIN still has a lot
of structural deficiencies but in this particular respect they made a
major improvement.

Regards,
Bill Herrin


--
For hire. https://bill.herrin.us/resume/
Re: [External] Normal ARIN registration service fees for LRSA entrants after 31 Dec 2023 (was: Fwd: [arin-announce] Availability of the Legacy Fee Cap for New LRSA Entrants Ending as of 31 December 2023) [ In reply to ]
On 16 Sep 2022, at 12:26 PM, Steve Noble <snoble@sonn.com<mailto:snoble@sonn.com>> wrote:


On Fri, Sep 16, 2022, 9:23 AM John Curran <jcurran@arin.net<mailto:jcurran@arin.net>> wrote:

Steve -

If you have IPv4 or IPv6 resources under an RSA/LRSA, then you are an ARIN service member.

ARIN service members in good standing can (via ARIN online or by contacting the RSD helpdesk) opt
to become ARIN general members and participate in ARIN governance – this includes agreeing to be
included on the ARIN member list, assigning a voting contact for your organization, and participating in
ARIN elections.

Hi John,

My point was that you said community, not general members. I understand that I am blocked from voting because I don't pay enough.

There is no additional fee involved in becoming an ARIN general member - it’s available
to all service members in good standing upon request (“good standing” meaning current
with ARIN on their invoiced fees.)

For more information see here – https://www.arin.net/announcements/20211229/

Thanks,
/John

John Curran
President and CEO
American Registry for Internet Numbers
Re: [External] Normal ARIN registration service fees for LRSA entrants after 31 Dec 2023 [ In reply to ]
John Curran wrote on 9/16/22 9:30 AM:
>
>> On 16 Sep 2022, at 12:26 PM, Steve Noble <snoble@sonn.com
>> <mailto:snoble@sonn.com>> wrote:
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Sep 16, 2022, 9:23 AM John Curran <jcurran@arin.net
>> <mailto:jcurran@arin.net>> wrote:
>>
>>
>> Steve -
>>
>> If you have IPv4 or IPv6 resources under an RSA/LRSA, then you
>> are an ARIN service member.
>>
>> ARIN service members in good standing can (via ARIN online or by
>> contacting the RSD helpdesk) opt
>> to become ARIN general members and participate in ARIN governance
>> – this includes agreeing to be
>> included on the ARIN member list, assigning a voting contact for
>> your organization, and participating in
>> ARIN elections.
>>
>>
>> Hi John,
>>
>> My point was that you said community, not general members.  I
>> understand that I am blocked from voting because I don't pay enough.
>
> There is no additional fee involved in becoming an ARIN general member
> - it’s available
> to all service members in good standing upon request (“good standing”
> meaning current
> with ARIN on their invoiced fees.)
>
> For more information see here –
> https://www.arin.net/announcements/20211229/

Hi John,

In my reading of that announcement that there is an additional fee. I do
not have any IPv4 or IPv6 resources so I would need to acquire them and
pay for them to be allowed to vote on things that directly affect me.  I
am not sure how this is different than before.  I am still
disenfranchised as a ASN only customer.

"Presently be an ARIN Service Member in good standing with IPv4 and/or
IPv6 number resources receiving services under a valid ARIN registration
services agreement."

--
Thank you,
Steven
Re: [External] Normal ARIN registration service fees for LRSA entrants after 31 Dec 2023 [ In reply to ]
William Herrin wrote on 9/16/22 9:28 AM:
> On Fri, Sep 16, 2022 at 9:09 AM Steve Noble <snoble@sonn.com> wrote:
>> On Fri, Sep 16, 2022, 8:55 AM John Curran <jcurran@arin.net> wrote:
>>> It’s an artifact of our formation that we are presently providing services to any customers absent any agreement
>>> and while ARIN continues to do so (by providing basic services to legacy customers), the long-term direction is
>>> to provide the same services to all customers under the same agreement and fees – anything else wouldn’t be
>>> equitable.
>>>
>>> (This is the direction that the ARIN Board of Trustees has set based on community input; I will note that
>>> the ARIN Board is itself elected by the community and that we have our annual election upcoming –
>>
>> Unless the rules have changed, this statement is incorrect.
>>
>> The board is not elected by the community, it is elected by ARIN customers who pay for the privilege to vote.
>>
>> Even though I pay significant money to ARIN I am not allowed to vote, but as far as I know, I am a part of the community.
> Hi Steve,
>
> Actually, the rules HAVE changed. Under the new fee schedule, every
> payer except AS-only payers are eligible to vote. ARIN still has a lot
> of structural deficiencies but in this particular respect they made a
> major improvement.
>
> Regards,
> Bill Herrin
>
Hi Bill,

I appreciate your response, I remember all of the discussions around
this change and the positive/negative aspects of it, but it did not
correct the disenfranchisement of ASN only holders who are customer and
do have to pay for services which are voted on and affected by the voting.

--
Thank you,
Steven
Re: [External] Normal ARIN registration service fees for LRSA entrants after 31 Dec 2023 [ In reply to ]
On Fri, Sep 16, 2022 at 9:51 AM Steve Noble <snoble@sonn.com> wrote:
> William Herrin wrote on 9/16/22 9:28 AM:
> > Actually, the rules HAVE changed. Under the new fee schedule, every
> > payer except AS-only payers are eligible to vote. ARIN still has a lot
> > of structural deficiencies but in this particular respect they made a
> > major improvement.
>
> I appreciate your response, I remember all of the discussions around
> this change and the positive/negative aspects of it, but it did not
> correct the disenfranchisement of ASN only holders who are customer and
> do have to pay for services which are voted on and affected by the voting.

True. But the practical effects of ARIN policy on AS numbers are so
minimal that with a choice between paying the AS annual fee and the
minimum service member annual fee, it makes sense to pay the smaller
fee. The AS number annual fee is a tad heftier than it ought to be for
the work reasonably expected of ARIN to operate the relevant registry
components. I expect they're lumping more into general overhead than
they really ought to and then spreading the overhead among all payers.
But c'est la vie. A lean, mean machine ARIN is not, at least not any
more.

Regards,
Bill Herrin


--
For hire. https://bill.herrin.us/resume/
Re: [External] Normal ARIN registration service fees for LRSA entrants after 31 Dec 2023 [ In reply to ]
> On 16 Sep 2022, at 12:51 PM, Steve Noble <snoble@sonn.com> wrote:
>
> I appreciate your response, I remember all of the discussions around this change and the positive/negative aspects of it, but it did not correct the disenfranchisement of ASN only holders who are customer and do have to pay for services which are voted on and affected by the voting.

Steve -

You are correct – while ARIN did open up the ability to vote to all IPv4 and IPv6 resource holders (as opposed
to previously just “ISPs”), we did not go as far as to open up membership to ASN-only customers…

Note - if the reason that you are paying "significant money” to ARIN is because you have more than one ASN
(and therefore are paying $150 per-ASN annual maintenance fee), I would suggest you review if you qualify for
a /24 IPv4 block from the ARIN waiting list (and applying asap if that’s the case), as your annual ARIN payment
would drop upon receipt (i.e. you would become a 3X-Small registration services plan customer paying $250/year
in total rather than paying the per-ASN maintenance fees), and also be able to opt into general membership and
thus participating in voting if desired.

FYI,
/John

John Curran
President and CEO
American Registry for Internet Numbers
Re: [External] Normal ARIN registration service fees for LRSA entrants after 31 Dec 2023 [ In reply to ]
On Fri, Sep 16, 2022 at 10:12 AM John Curran <jcurran@arin.net> wrote:
> Note - if the reason that you are paying "significant money” to ARIN is because you have more than one ASN
> (and therefore are paying $150 per-ASN annual maintenance fee), I would suggest you review if you qualify for
> a /24 IPv4 block from the ARIN waiting list (and applying asap if that’s the case), as your annual ARIN payment
> would drop upon receipt (i.e. you would become a 3X-Small registration services plan customer paying $250/year
> in total rather than paying the per-ASN maintenance fees), and also be able to opt into general membership and
> thus participating in voting if desired.

Or get an IPv6 /48 which could be fulfilled immediately (no waiting
list) and have the same impact of making you a 3x-small services plan
customer paying $250/year total.

Regards,
Bill Herrin

--
For hire. https://bill.herrin.us/resume/
Re: [External] Normal ARIN registration service fees for LRSA entrants after 31 Dec 2023 [ In reply to ]
> On 16 Sep 2022, at 1:22 PM, William Herrin <bill@herrin.us> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Sep 16, 2022 at 10:12 AM John Curran <jcurran@arin.net> wrote:
>> Note - if the reason that you are paying "significant money” to ARIN is because you have more than one ASN
>> (and therefore are paying $150 per-ASN annual maintenance fee), I would suggest you review if you qualify for
>> a /24 IPv4 block from the ARIN waiting list (and applying asap if that’s the case), as your annual ARIN payment
>> would drop upon receipt (i.e. you would become a 3X-Small registration services plan customer paying $250/year
>> in total rather than paying the per-ASN maintenance fees), and also be able to opt into general membership and
>> thus participating in voting if desired.
>
> Or get an IPv6 /48 which could be fulfilled immediately (no waiting
> list) and have the same impact of making you a 3x-small services plan
> customer paying $250/year total.

Thank you Bill – obviously another excellent option…

(He could even do both, since the RSP plan category is based on the largest of the two resource holding – so that
when an IPv4 /24 is eventually issued, his overall customer category would still remain at 3X-Small, i.e. $250/year)

FYI,
/John

John Curran
President and CEO
American Registry for Internet Numbers
Re: [External] Normal ARIN registration service fees for LRSA entrants after 31 Dec 2023 [ In reply to ]
On Fri, Sep 16, 2022 at 10:29 AM John Curran <jcurran@arin.net> wrote:
> > On 16 Sep 2022, at 1:22 PM, William Herrin <bill@herrin.us> wrote:
> > On Fri, Sep 16, 2022 at 10:12 AM John Curran <jcurran@arin.net> wrote:
> >> Note - if the reason that you are paying "significant money” to ARIN is because you have more than one ASN
> >> (and therefore are paying $150 per-ASN annual maintenance fee), I would suggest you review if you qualify for
> >> a /24 IPv4 block from the ARIN waiting list (and applying asap if that’s the case), as your annual ARIN payment
> >> would drop upon receipt (i.e. you would become a 3X-Small registration services plan customer paying $250/year
> >> in total rather than paying the per-ASN maintenance fees), and also be able to opt into general membership and
> >> thus participating in voting if desired.
> >
> > Or get an IPv6 /48 which could be fulfilled immediately (no waiting
> > list) and have the same impact of making you a 3x-small services plan
> > customer paying $250/year total.
>
> Thank you Bill – obviously another excellent option…
>
> (He could even do both, since the RSP plan category is based on the largest of the two resource holding – so that
> when an IPv4 /24 is eventually issued, his overall customer category would still remain at 3X-Small, i.e. $250/year)

Hi John,

He might not qualify for an IPv4 /24 under current ARIN policy but
with AS numbers in use it's a near certainty that he qualifies for an
IPv6 /48 with little effort.

Regards,
Bill Herrin



--
For hire. https://bill.herrin.us/resume/
Re: [External] Normal ARIN registration service fees for LRSA entrants after 31 Dec 2023 [ In reply to ]
I'm not trying to troll, this is a serious question:

Is there a formal agreement that says that all legacy resources will
receive free registry services forever and ever or is it just an
informal "That's how it was done"?

Aaron
Re: [External] Normal ARIN registration service fees for LRSA entrants after 31 Dec 2023 [ In reply to ]
> On 16 Sep 2022, at 2:21 PM, Aaron Wendel <aaron@wholesaleinternet.net> wrote:
>
> I'm not trying to troll, this is a serious question:
>
> Is there a formal agreement that says that all legacy resources will receive free registry services forever and ever or is it just an informal "That's how it was done”?

No formal agreement, but those involved in ARIN’s formation did indicate that at transition
the existing registrations would be maintained without a need for agreement or fee.

The ARIN Board has maintained that same position over the last 25 years –
I’d expect that to continue similarly unless a strong reason emerged why that is no
longer advisable and/or the community reached consensus on different approach.

Thanks!
/John

John Curran
President and CEO
American Registry for Internet Numbers
Re: [External] Normal ARIN registration service fees for LRSA entrants after 31 Dec 2023 [ In reply to ]
On Fri, Sep 16, 2022 at 11:21 AM Aaron Wendel
<aaron@wholesaleinternet.net> wrote:
> Is there a formal agreement that says that all legacy resources will
> receive free registry services forever and ever or is it just an
> informal "That's how it was done"?

Hi Aaron,

That is a... complicated... topic. To help illuminate it, I'm going to
rephrase the question.

Absent a contract between ARIN and an organization assigned IP
addresses prior to ARIN's existence (legacy registrant), what rights
does the legacy registrant have over the addresses and what rights
does ARIN have?

The original assignment process from representatives of the United
States government was woefully nonspecific about address recipients'
rights. During ARIN's formation, representations were made to the
government to the effect that ARIN would maintain the pre-existing
registrations without impairment. The agreement with the US government
which allowed ARIN to subsume address registry duties failed to speak
at all to the matter of rights retained by legacy registrants or
transferred to ARIN.

Every time the question has come up in court, the matter has ended
either with a determination that the part was not, in fact, the
registrant or with a negotiated settlement between the registrant an
ARIN.

So the bottom line is: we don't know what, if anything, ARIN is
legally required to do for the legacy registrants AND we don't know
what, if anything, ARIN is legally allowed to unilaterally do with
respect to the legacy registrations.

ARIN has its official theories and each of the legacy registrants have
theirs. For the past 25 years, ARIN has not elected to challenge the
legacy registrants in a manner substantive enough to require the
question to be resolved.


Regards,
Bill Herrin


--
For hire. https://bill.herrin.us/resume/
Re: [External] Normal ARIN registration service fees for LRSA entrants after 31 Dec 2023 [ In reply to ]
On 16 Sep 2022, at 2:53 PM, William Herrin <bill@herrin.us<mailto:bill@herrin.us>> wrote:

ARIN has its official theories and each of the legacy registrants have
theirs. For the past 25 years, ARIN has not elected to challenge the
legacy registrants in a manner substantive enough to require the
question to be resolved.

<chuckle> I’d disagree with that characterization - since this has been before judges
and resolved numerous times.

We’ve actually had the matter before many judges, and have never been ordered to do
anything other than operate the registry per the number resource policy as developed by
this community – this has been the consistent outcome throughout both civil and bankruptcy
proceedings. Yes, we do settle cases, but only when that basic principle is upheld. At no
time has the alternative (that for some reason legacy resource holders do not have meet
the policies developed by the ARIN community) been upheld in any orders granted – and
not for lack of trying.

Alas, those who seek such an outcome have never been successful in arguing its merits,
and instead consistently end up settling with orders that recognize ARIN’s ability to operate
the registry according to the community-developed policy, including the application of the
policy to their address blocks. ARIN simply doesn’t settle absent those terms, as it is simply
a fundamental principle of our inception.

Thanks!
/John

John Curran
President and CEO
American Registry for Internet Numbers
Re: [External] Normal ARIN registration service fees for LRSA entrants after 31 Dec 2023 [ In reply to ]
On Fri, Sep 16, 2022 at 12:00 PM John Curran <jcurran@arin.net> wrote:
> We’ve actually had the matter before many judges, and have never been ordered to do
> anything other than operate the registry per the number resource policy as developed by
> this community – this has been the consistent outcome throughout both civil and bankruptcy
> proceedings. Yes, we do settle cases, but only when that basic principle is upheld. At no
> time has the alternative (that for some reason legacy resource holders do not have meet
> the policies developed by the ARIN community) been upheld in any orders granted – and
> not for lack of trying.

Well John, the thing about settled cases and orders the court
-doesn't- make is that they create no precedent and ultimately fail to
answer the legal question for the next case. All they show is that in
cases where the registrant could prove he was the real registrant,
ARIN offered terms more attractive to the registrant than pursuing
litigation to its conclusion.

Whatever line you'd have to cross for a registrant to go the distance
with you in court, the status quo doesn't cross it.

> instead consistently end up settling with orders that recognize ARIN’s
> ability to operate the registry according to the community-developed policy

That's quite an overstatement. As far as I'm aware, with respect to
the legacy registrations the only order any court ever made was that
within the facts of that particular case, ARIN could refuse to
-record- a transfer of registration absent a contract.

Regards,
Bill Herrin
--
For hire. https://bill.herrin.us/resume/
Re: [External] Normal ARIN registration service fees for LRSA entrants after 31 Dec 2023 [ In reply to ]
William-

I am trying to follow your train of thought here. Are you stating that it
is somehow ARIN's responsibility to force a legal case to a
conclusion solely to settle the question of legacy allocation rights, a
problem which predates ARIN's existence? Or am I misunderstanding you?

On Fri, Sep 16, 2022 at 3:22 PM William Herrin <bill@herrin.us> wrote:

> On Fri, Sep 16, 2022 at 12:00 PM John Curran <jcurran@arin.net> wrote:
> > We’ve actually had the matter before many judges, and have never been
> ordered to do
> > anything other than operate the registry per the number resource policy
> as developed by
> > this community – this has been the consistent outcome throughout both
> civil and bankruptcy
> > proceedings. Yes, we do settle cases, but only when that basic
> principle is upheld. At no
> > time has the alternative (that for some reason legacy resource holders
> do not have meet
> > the policies developed by the ARIN community) been upheld in any orders
> granted – and
> > not for lack of trying.
>
> Well John, the thing about settled cases and orders the court
> -doesn't- make is that they create no precedent and ultimately fail to
> answer the legal question for the next case. All they show is that in
> cases where the registrant could prove he was the real registrant,
> ARIN offered terms more attractive to the registrant than pursuing
> litigation to its conclusion.
>
> Whatever line you'd have to cross for a registrant to go the distance
> with you in court, the status quo doesn't cross it.
>
> > instead consistently end up settling with orders that recognize ARIN’s
> > ability to operate the registry according to the community-developed
> policy
>
> That's quite an overstatement. As far as I'm aware, with respect to
> the legacy registrations the only order any court ever made was that
> within the facts of that particular case, ARIN could refuse to
> -record- a transfer of registration absent a contract.
>
> Regards,
> Bill Herrin
> --
> For hire. https://bill.herrin.us/resume/
>
Re: [External] Normal ARIN registration service fees for LRSA entrants after 31 Dec 2023 [ In reply to ]
On Fri, Sep 16, 2022 at 12:31 PM Tom Beecher <beecher@beecher.cc> wrote:
> I am trying to follow your train of thought here. Are you stating that
> it is somehow ARIN's responsibility to force a legal case to a
> conclusion solely to settle the question of legacy allocation
> rights, a problem which predates ARIN's existence?

Hi Tom,

Not at all! I'm saying that the status quo for legacy registrants is
legally stable while the legal boundaries beyond the status quo are
murky no matter what anyone cares to claim.

Regards,
Bill Herrin


--
For hire. https://bill.herrin.us/resume/
Re: [External] Normal ARIN registration service fees for LRSA entrants after 31 Dec 2023 [ In reply to ]
> On 16 Sep 2022, at 3:21 PM, William Herrin <bill@herrin.us> wrote:
>
>> instead consistently end up settling with orders that recognize ARIN’s
>> ability to operate the registry according to the community-developed policy
>
> That's quite an overstatement. As far as I'm aware, with respect to
> the legacy registrations the only order any court ever made was that
> within the facts of that particular case, ARIN could refuse to
> -record- a transfer of registration absent a contract.

Bill –

What is “an IP address block assignment”? i.e. what exactly are we talking about having rights to?
You talk about a transfer of something distinct from the registry entry, but don’t actually say what
that is...

We know what it is not – it not “the right to route a range of IP addresses on the Internet” – as ISPs
control their own routers (and at no time did any of them delegate some portion of control over
their network routing to USG/SRI/ISI/GSI/NSI/NetSol/ARIN…)

I’ll assert that an “IP address block assignment” (regardless of when made) was the issuance of a set
of rights to a specific entry in the registry database: e.g., the right to have your organization associated
with a range of numbers in the Internet number registry, the right to be able to update the relevant fields
of that entry (like contact info), and the right to transfer these rights to other parties in accordance with
registry policy.

Parties issued IP address blocks were given those rights to their particular IP address block entry in
the registry database, and that registry database was transferred to ARIN at our inception. As such,
if you want an IP address block entry updated, it’s necessary to comply with ARIN’s policies as set
by this community.

Now you may believe the IP address blocks are something other than a limited set of rights to an
entry in the registry, and that’s just great. I think you’ll find that nearly everyone who wants to buy
rights to an IP address block expects that the registry entry will be updated, and that the update of
the entry constitutes the transfer of the rights, but you should feel free to hawk something else if
you think folks will buy it. Similarly, if you believe that you can transfer an “IP address block”
and somehow that gives you some legal authority over a portion of the ARIN registry, then you
should avail yourself of all appropriate legal means to enforce your purported rights and effect
that change. (It’s not that people haven’t come up with such interesting theories before, rather
that they’ve never held up in court…)

Again, to make sure there is 100% clarity: we have consistently ended up settling with orders
that recognize ARIN’s ability to operate the registry according to the community-developed
policy, including the application of that policy to legacy address blocks. ARIN simply doesn’t
settle absent those terms, as it is fundamental principle of our inception that this community
can set the policies used to administer the registry for this region.

Thanks,
/John

John Curran
President and CEO
American Registry for Internet Numbers

1 2 3  View All