[ppml] 2008-2 IPv4 transfer policy
michael.dillon at bt.com
michael.dillon at bt.com
Fri Mar 14 08:44:26 EDT 2008
- Previous message: [ppml] 2008-2 IPv4 transfer policy
- Next message: [ppml] ipv6 in the news
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
> > Sure it does Jo. You might have to "partner" with the existing > > registrant for a few months while you build the system (their > > contribution being the IP address space and the cheering > squad) before > > you could then justify a transfer under 8.2. In what practical way > > does that hinder the gray-market transfer of the block? > > Look, this topic has been cleared defined by ARIN numerous > times, I'm not going to waste my time with more of your "how > much can I deliberately misread the existing documentation" nonsense. I think this discussion illustrates how policymaking is different from network design and operations. In the technology world, you either do things correctly, according to the documentation, or it just doesn't work. Black or white. In the world of policymaking, there is no black and white. Everything is various shades of grey, so a grey market sale of IP addresses will work, even though it goes against the documentation. Sometimes you need to add a white lie or two to make it the right shade of grey, but that is exactly how people operate. And policy is all about people and processes, not really about technology at all. Which implies that if you want to make successful policies, you shouldn't strive for black and white solutions, because you will just end up introducing loopholes that could make your policy entirely ineffective. Accept that policy has some grey areas, and work like an artist, to blend various shades of grey into a multichromatic work of art. --Michael Dillon
- Previous message: [ppml] 2008-2 IPv4 transfer policy
- Next message: [ppml] ipv6 in the news
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the PPML mailing list