[ppml] Policy Proposal: IPv4 Transfer Policy Proposal

[Per Heldal]

On Tue, 2008-02-12 at 13:12 -0600, Bill Darte wrote:
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: ppml-bounces at arin.net [mailto:ppml-bounces at arin.net] On 
> > Behalf Of Per Heldal
> > Sent: Tuesday, February 12, 2008 3:04 AM
> > To: Ted Mittelstaedt
> > Cc: ppml at arin.net
> > Subject: Re: [ppml] Policy Proposal: IPv4 Transfer Policy Proposal
> > 
> > 
> > On Mon, 2008-02-11 at 16:36 -0800, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:
> > > I have some concerns with this proposal.
> > > 
> > > This policy seems to undermine the idea that IP addressing 
> > is assigned 
> > > on the basis of proving need.  It lends credibility to the 
> > idea that 
> > > IP addressing is property, and could open the door to any number of 
> > > lawsuits based on this.  For example if an organization "purchases" 
> > > IPv4 they could then file a lawsuit against a large provider which 
> > > decided to block access from that purchased block, claiming 
> > > discriminatory behavior.
> > 
> > The suggested policy also seems to be in conflict with the 
> > RIR principle of not being involved in routing. Wherever 
> > there's money to be made there's greed and that can't be 
> > contained by simply telling people to "be nice". The value of 
> > this kind of policy is questionable if it cannot be enforced. 
> > To regulate other people's use of resources is fundamentally 
> > different from the task of coordinating handouts from a resource-pool.
> 
> 
> The transfer policy proposal does not attempt to eliminate greed, nor
> does it try and enforce people to be nice.
> It trys to coordinate transfers in such a way that does not abandon the
> notion of 'justified need' and also provides continuing stability in the
> industry and confidence that the address resources and associated ARIN
> services that are being transferred are as close to the free-pool
> precedent as possible, by way of thinking...
> 

You define conditions which must be met to approve transfer, yet claim
to place no restrictions on the process transfer ??? 

> The policy does not restrict people from transferring resource in some
> other way and with whatever conditions and qualifications are made... I
> intends to give the ARIN region an alternative and clear set of
> conditions under which transfers are made and recognized.  The expected
> value is that people with TRUST this process more if ARIN contributes to
> or coordinates it.

I agree with the motive, but think it's naive to expect the desired
effect unless there are sanctions in place to deal with offenders (LIRs
required to drop/filter disputed blocks or similar), but then you're
back in conflict with the traditional hands-off-approach to routing
again.


//per