[arin-ppml] Draft Policy 2011-1 - Inter-RIRTransfers -Shepherd's Inquiry

[Owen DeLong]

>> 
>> So to think we have any significant power to prevent the rise of an IPv4
>> market is naive. What we should do is acknowledge it and take the steps to
>> transition ARIN from an arbiter of who gets addresses to a title-agency
>> whose routing authority is respected enough to handle the challenges
>> facing
>> registration in the post-exhaust world.
> 
> This falls back to the argument that illicit drug sales are going to happen anyway and we can't stop them so we should legislate and tax them.  I personally don't buy that argument and I refuse to believe that we should facilitate a bad practice just because it is inevitable.  
> 

Very poor choice of analogy.

Prohibition of vice is a very different thing from regulation of a market.

> The majority of drivers break speed limit laws, yet I still feel speed limit laws are good and necessary.  Even if rules don't completely eradicate a problem the existence of the rules can ameliorate the problem.
> 

I think there are places where speed limit laws make sense. I support what California calls the basic speed law and certain laws of presumption (known as prima facie speed limits). However, there are many speed limit laws that make no sense yet remain in place (70 MPH on I-5 is a good example).

Getting back to the subject however, Kevin is correct in that even if our efforts to regulate the market are not 100% successful it is still useful to attempt to do so.

Owen