> On 18 Sep 2022, at 20:04, Owen DeLong via NANOG <nanog@nanog.org> wrote: > > I could be mistaken, but I believe that RIPE NCC provides RPKI services for > Legacy without Contract resource holders.
The policy: https://www.ripe.net/publications/docs/ripe-639 The details: https://www.ripe.net/manage-ips-and-asns/legacy-resources/ripe-ncc-services-to-legacy-internet-resource-holders Once you’re set, you can go through a wizard that will give you access to a subset of the RIPE NCC Portal that will only let you manage Hosted or Delegated RPKI and nothing else. https://www.ripe.net/manage-ips-and-asns/resource-management/rpki/resource-certification-rpki-for-provider-independent-end-users -Alex > > Owen > > >> On Sep 15, 2022, at 15:55 , Rubens Kuhl <rube...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> You could try suggesting IANA/PTI/ICANN to have a different RPKI trust >> anchor and provide such services to legacy block holders. As you >> mentioned, that would probably have a price tag attached to it to >> cover the costs for such operations, but a contract could stay away >> from ownership issues and not either say the blocks are yours or that >> the blocks could be taken from you. Pay for the services, get RPKI; >> don't pay them, RPKI ROAs expire. >> >> I have a feeling that the recurring cost would be higher than using >> the scale that the RIR system has in providing those services, and >> that doing RIR-shopping (like what was already suggested here, moving >> the resources to RIPE) is simpler and more cost effective. But this >> would at least expose the real costs without making the RIR-allocated >> resource holders subsidize legacy resource holders, which is the good >> thing I see in the direction ARIN is going. >> >> Rubens >> >> On Fri, Sep 16, 2022 at 5:18 AM Tom Krenn via NANOG <nanog@nanog.org> wrote: >>> >>> Speaking from the enterprise / end site perspective I would bet there are a >>> lot of legacy holders that other than maybe updating their reverse DNS >>> records once or twice haven’t looked at ARIN policies or their allocation >>> since the late 1980s. In most cases there really is not strong technical >>> reason to, the stuff just keeps working. >>> >>> We are put in kind of an awkward place by the current policies. On one hand >>> some of us would like to be good Internet citizens and implement things >>> like IRR and RPKI for our resources to help the larger community. But show >>> the RSA/LRSA to your lawyers with the justification that "I would like to >>> implement RPKI, but everything will keep working even if we don't." You can >>> bet they will never jump on board. On one hand there is a push from ARIN >>> and the larger community to use these advanced services, but on the other >>> hand the fees and risk far outweigh the benefits. (Heck the fees aren’t >>> even that big of a deal, just the risk of loosing control of our legacy >>> allocations.) >>> >>> Tom Krenn >>> Network Architect >>> Enterprise Architecture - Information Technology >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: NANOG <nanog-bounces+tom.krenn=hennepin...@nanog.org> On Behalf Of >>> John Curran >>> Sent: Thursday, September 15, 2022 3:35 PM >>> To: John Gilmore <g...@toad.com> >>> Cc: North American Network Operators' Group <nanog@nanog.org> >>> Subject: [External] Re: 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) >>> >>> CAUTION: This email was sent from outside of Hennepin County. Unless you >>> recognize the sender and know the content, do not click links or open >>> attachments. >>> >>> John - >>> >>> Your summary is not inaccurate; 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. >>> >>> For more than two decades legacy resource holders have been provided the >>> opportunity to normalize their relations with ARIN by entry into an LRSA - >>> thus receiving the same services on the same terms and conditions as all >>> others in the region (and also with a favorable fee cap applied to their >>> total annual registry fees.) While many folks have taken advantage of that >>> offer over the years, it’s quite possible that all of those interested have >>> already considered the matter and hence going forward we are returning to >>> the refrain of the entire community in seeking the lowest fees applied >>> equitably to all in the region. >>> >>> As we’ve recently added more advanced services that may be of interest to >>> many in the community (RPKI and authenticated IRR) and also have just made >>> a favorable simplification to the RSA in section 7 (an area that has been >>> problematic for some organizations in the past), it is important that ARIN >>> not subset availability of the legacy fee cap without significant notice, >>> as there many be a few folks out there who were unaware of LRSA with fee >>> cap availability and/or haven’t recently taken a look at the various >>> tradeoffs. >>> >>> In any case, legacy resource holders who don’t care for these advanced >>> services (whose development and maintenance is paid for by the ARIN >>> community) can simply continue to maintain their legacy resources in the >>> ARIN registry. They do not have to do anything, as ARIN is continuing to >>> provide basic registration services to the thousands of non-contracted >>> legacy resource holders (including online updates to your resources, >>> reverse DNS services, >>> etc.) without fee or contract. >>> >>> Thanks! >>> /John >>> >>> John Curran >>> President and CEO >>> American Registry for Internet Numbers >>> >>>> On 15 Sep 2022, at 3:41 PM, John Gilmore <g...@toad.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> John Curran wrote: >>>>>> We strongly encourage all legacy resource holders who have not yet >>>>>> signed an LRSA to cover their legacy resources to >>>> >>>> Randy Bush <ra...@psg.com> wrote: >>>>> consult a competent lawyer before signing an LRSA >>>> >>>> Amen to that. ARIN's stance on legacy resources has traditionally >>>> been that ARIN would prefer to charge you annually for them, and then >>>> "recover" them (take them away from you) if you ever stop paying, or >>>> if they ever decide that you are not using them wisely. If you once >>>> agree to an ARIN contract, your resources lose their "legacy" status >>>> and you become just another sharecropper subject to ARIN's future >>>> benevolence or lack thereof. >>>> >>>> The change recently announced by John Curran will make the situation >>>> very slightly worse, by making ARIN's annual fees for legacy resources >>>> changeable at their option, instead of being capped by contract. ARIN >>>> management could have changed their offer to be better, if they wanted >>>> to attract legacy users, but they made an explicit choice to do the >>>> opposite. >>>> >>>> By contrast, RIPE has developed a much more welcoming stance on legacy >>>> resources, including: >>>> >>>> * retaining the legacy status of resources after a transfer or sale >>>> * allowing resources to be registered without paying annual fees to RIPE >>>> (merely paying a one-time transaction fee), so that later non-payment >>>> of annual fees can't be used as an excuse to steal the resources. >>>> * agreeing that RIPE members will keep all their legacy resources even if >>>> they later cease to be RIPE members >>>> >>>> You are within the RIPE service area if your network touches Europe, >>>> northern Asia, or Greenland. This can be as simple as having a rented >>>> or donated server located in Europe, or as complicated as running a >>>> worldwide service provider. If you have a presence there, you can >>>> transfer your worldwide resources out from under ARIN policies and put >>>> them under RIPE's jurisdiction instead. >>>> >>>> Moving to RIPE is not an unalloyed good; Europeans invented >>>> bureaucracy, and RIPE pursues it with vigor. And getting the above >>>> treatment may require firmly asserting to RIPE that you want it, >>>> rather than accepting the defaults. But their motives are more >>>> benevolent than ARIN's toward legacy resource holders; RIPE honestly >>>> seems to want to gather in legacy resource holders, either as RIPE >>>> members or not, without reducing any of the holders' rights or abilities. >>>> I commend them for that. >>>> >>>> Other RIRs may have other good or bad policies about legacy resource >>>> holders. As Randy proposed, consult a lawyer competent in legacy >>>> domain registration issues before making any changes. >>>> >>>> John >>> >>> >>> >>> 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. >
