[ppml] Policy Proposal: IPv4 Soft Landing

[michael.dillon at bt.com]

> To a first order I agree with Randy that it is not the RIR's 
> job to force the members to be proactive. At the same time it 
> is a reasonable part of stewardship to make sure the 
> membership is informed so the inevitable claims about 'you 
> didn't tell me' can be dealt with. In light of this, the 
> message has to go out to everyone, not just those that are 
> actively applying; so the past policy proposals appear to be 
> short-sighted in that you only find out about the change when 
> you come knocking for more.

This is an area where ARIN, and the RIRs in general, are failing badly.
Why does ARIN not issue press releases to the technology press on a
regular basis with statistical highlights? The discussion we are having
right now is the equivalent of "backroom politics". It is not open and
frank. It involves a tiny in-group who track this stuff all the time. I
suspect that in most ARIN member companies, the activities of ARIN are
unknown to anyone expect the ARIN contacts and a few technical people. 

This is the kind of information that needs to be on the desks of
decision-makers because without the information, they cannot make
decisions on the matter.

--Michael Dillon