ACSP Suggestion 2011.23: RSA Changes to Reflect NRPM Section 12
- Mike Joseph
- Submitted On:
- 10 June 2011
I have submitted proposal 151 which is intended to remove needs requirements from IPv4 transfers. My proposal can only change the NRPM, but if that change is effected, language in the existing RSA which
gives ARIN the right to review address allocations for utilization, via the "use for intended purposes" language in section 8, will be inconsistent with policy. If the proposal is adopted but the RSA is not changed, transferees will be subject to revokation of their addresses per the RSA they are required to
sign. I suggest the RSA language be changed in any case, so the rights afforded to ARIN by the RSA in terms of review and revokation are limited to application of the policies in section 12 of the NRPM without listing the potential review and revokation policies separately in the RSA.
- 24 June 2011
24 June 2011
You have noted a concern with regard to language in Section 8 of ARIN's current standard RSA and the potential for inconsistency in the event that proposal 151 is adopted in the future resulting in a change to the NRPM. Further you have suggested a textual change to the language of Section 8 of the RSA.
As you are most likely aware, ARIN implements community developed policies and has a responsibility to follow such policies. To the extent that the community revises or amends any of the provisions of the NRPM, ARIN acts accordingly and adjusts its operations as may be necessary to offers its services in compliance with such revisions or amendment to the NRPM. At present, our view is that the language of the RSA is consistent with current policy. Therefore, it would be premature to modify the language of the RSA in anticipation of a change to the NRPM that may or may not occur as the result of our Policy Development Process. Please rest assured that if the community does adopt a change to the NRPM that for consistency would require an amendment or modification to the language of the RSA, ARIN staff and legal counsel will work towards making any applicable changes.
At this time your suggestion will be closed, but this issue can be revisited if necessary at a later time.