[ppml] Draft ARIN Recomendation
Harald Tveit Alvestrand
harald at alvestrand.no
Mon Oct 25 04:01:08 EDT 2004
The reason the -local-address draft is being brought forward separately
from the -ula-central draft is because it's been noted that central
allocation has a LOT more issues than local allocation (such as fees).
So the -ula-central draft has some more time before the IETF makes a
decision on it - more time for comments to enter the ordinary IETF WG
FWIW: I have heard the suggestion that IANA should ask the NRO to undertake
the role of the central registry. It's an obvious candidate.
But this comment:
> ARIN continues to operate because it collects fees from its members.
> Members continue to pay ARIN because they realize there is a need
> for a globally unique identifier management system, that it costs
> money, and that ARIN does a good job.
> If there existed a system where people could get globally unique
> identifiers for free, I believe they would. We have already seen
> objections from some parts of the world that fees are too high, and
> a barrier to entry. Also, in this day of cost conscious operating
> I believe many engineers would wonder why they don't abandon the
> globally unique numbers provided by ARIN for a fee, for the globally
> unique identifiers that are free. Put simply, these proposals create
> a direct financial incentive for people NOT to use ARIN's services.
is one I can't use as a technical argument.
ARIN is a "natural monopoly" service provider, and has been defined as a
quite restricted entity in order to make it trusted with that job.
Writing technical standards to protect a monopoly's revenue stream would be
what they call a "career-limiting move" for the IETF.....
More information about the ARIN-PPML