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
