[ppml] Getting aggressive about vetting

> People that make arguments like you are doing here are using an old
> trick, you don't like a policy so you act like the instigation of
> the policy is somehow a personal insult to everyone, or somehow
> means the policymaker assumes everyone is a criminal.  Then you
> use that straw man to argue the policy should never be put into
> place.

What policy? Did someone propose a policy?

All I have seen is a lot of rambling discussion.

> What drives IPv4 towards exhaustion is UTILIZATION of 
> routable numbers,
> NOT GROWTH.  These are two VERY DIFFERENT THINGS.

Minor details. The network is growing which leads to growing utilization
of addresses. We still won't get anywhere by auditing folks to find
their secret hordes of addresses. Those hordes won't be big enough to
stave off exhaustion, because the growth continues.

> >Even the best estimates of idle addresses
> >tucked away here and there, only suggest enough to provide a few more
> >months growth.

> estimates are baloney until you take some action to try to prove them
> out.

But when the action is very costly, a prudent steward will opt for
alternate approaches that cost less.

> >It is not ARIN's job to solve the IPv4 exhaustion problem.
> 
> If it is within ARIN's power to alleviate IPv4 exhaustion then I
> think it is an abrogation of their stewardship if they do nothing.

Nope! It simply is not ARIN's job to do this. It isn't allowed by ARIN's
charter and under the laws of the United States and the Commonwealth of
Deleware, the ARIN Trustees have a fiduciary duty to ensure that ARIN
does not overstep its charter. In addition, IPv4 exhaustion is a global
issue that should be addressed in international fora such as the IETF or
ICANN.

--Michael Dillon