ARIN-PPML Message

[arin-ppml] ARIN-prop-136 Services Opt-out Allowed for Unaffiliated Address Blocks

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Benson Schliesser [mailto:bensons at queuefull.net]
> Sent: Thursday, February 24, 2011 12:52 PM
> To: Keith W. Hare
> Cc: arin-ppml at arin.net
> Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] ARIN-prop-136 Services Opt-out Allowed for
> Unaffiliated Address Blocks
> 
> Hi, Keith.
> 
> On Feb 23, 2011, at 10:29 PM, Keith W. Hare wrote:
> 
> > I am opposed to prop-136.
> >
> > Prop-136 is dancing around the edges of the real question of whether
> the ARIN community wants to give up on participant-driven policies and
> needs-based resource allocations in favor of money-based allocations and
> for-profit corporate policies.
> 
> I don't think prop-136 dances around the issue: it deals with it
> directly, for legacy holders in the ARIN region, by allowing them to
> opt-out of ARIN regulation.

Opt-out of ARIN regulation in favor of what? What regulations would a for-profit registration service impose? 
	
And what is really in this for me?

The ARIN process has been working fairly well -- the internet works reasonably well most of the time. What is it that is not working therefore needs to be changed? 

There is a little problem looming of running out of IPv4 addresses, but how would a for-profit registration service solve that any better than ARIN can? I've read discussion of market efficiencies, but what are the costs of using a for-profit registration service really going to be? How are the costs going to be cheaper than the costs for working with ARIN?

The ARIN policy process is driven by the participants. My company has a legacy /24. However, I have as much voice in the ARIN policy process as someone representing the largest ISP. Why would I want to switch to a for-profit corporation where I would have no say in policies?

What is it that the ARIN "regulation" is preventing me from doing? The only thing I can see that ARIN "regulation" prevents me from doing is transferring our IPv4 address resource to an organization who cannot justify a need for IPv4 addresses. I suppose that if someone offered ten million (US dollars) for our /24, I might feel differently, but I do not see any benefit to me in supporting IPv4 address speculators. 

As a small IPv4 resource holder, I think my company is better served by ARIN as it exists today than it would be by a for-profit registration service. Therefore, I continue to oppose Prop-136.



Keith Hare

______________________________________________________________
 
Keith W. Hare                     JCC Consulting, Inc.
keith at jcc.com                     600 Newark Road
Phone: 740-587-0157               P.O. Box 381
Fax: 740-587-0163                 Granville, Ohio 43023
http://www.jcc.com                USA
______________________________________________________________