[arin-ppml] Q1 - ARIN address transfer policy: why thetriggerdate?
Milton L Mueller
mueller at syr.edu
Fri Jun 20 19:27:31 EDT 2008
My point about the ARIN policy is that it is so restrictive (compare it
to the RIPE and APNIC proposals) that people WILL disregard the rules,
and the transfers of addresses that do occur will go underground.
The post by Jay Sudowksi was particularly illuminating in this regard.
It is bad policy design, not bad human nature, that causes this problem.
Here is what the ARIN policy does in a nutshell. It says: "hey, you
people who want to buy addresses? don't think for a moment that you can
transact directly with a seller, you have to go through us and WE will
tell you whether you need the resources or not. Come to us and we will
do a needs assessment _not only_ on the addresses you are asking for but
on the ones you already have, too. Heck we might even take some away."
And then it says, "hey sellers, if you want to participate in this
market say goodbye to any ARIN resources for 4 years, and you can't get
any transfers for years either. And oh, the buyer can't really pay you
until we decide what you can give him, which you will not be able to
predict. And oh by the way, you get to pay a special transfer fee for
Those conditions are ridiculous. Or rather, as Owen and Leo have
basically confessed in public, they were designed by people who don't
want there to be transfer markets at all.
Since IPv4 resources are so heavily concentrated in the ARIN region, it
is incumbent upon ARIN to handle the problem in the best possible way.
Policy 2008-2 isn't even close to being good, much less "best."
You do have to decide. Either liberalize 2008-2 along the lines of the
RIPE proposal, (which as far as I can tell would do a good job of
facilitating market transfers while eliminating harmful speculation or
hoarding) or make it clear to the world that you're not going to allow
address markets as a way to force them into v6. If the latter, then you
are playing chicken with the v4-v6 transition and risk driving a hell of
a lot of the v4 economy underground. Hope you're right.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net [mailto:arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net]
> Behalf Of Chris Grundemann
> Sent: Friday, June 20, 2008 3:43 PM
> To: Randy Bush
> Cc: ARIN PPML
> Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Q1 - ARIN address transfer policy: why
> On Fri, Jun 20, 2008 at 1:26 PM, Randy Bush <randy at psg.com> wrote:
> >> People who are willing to break the rules do not care what rules
> >> put in place.
> > this is the "they are bad people" theory, a subset of the black
> > helicopter theme.
> > repeat the following mantra a few times and the fear will go away.
> > it's just business.
> > they are just trying to get their work done.
> > of course there are bad folk on the net; c.f. recent hijack
> > but the current address traders seem to be consenting parties on
> > sides. they are just trying to get their work done despite amateur
> > over-regulation.
> I was not trying to imply that anyone involved was necessarily "bad"
> (or "good" for that matter) and I definitely have no opinion on their
> mode of transportation ;). My point is that if a market (of sorts -
> term applied liberally) exists today when IP numbers are free and
> available, why would these market players go through the trouble of a
> sanctioned transfer in the future? Why (and/or how) will this policy
> (or any transfer policy) change existing behavior?
> I simply suggest that some will "just try to get their work done
> despite [perceived] amateur over-regulation" regardless of what that
> specific regulation is.
> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN
> Public Policy
> Mailing List (ARIN-PPML at arin.net).
> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
> Please contact the ARIN Member Services Help Desk at info at arin.net if
> experience any issues.
More information about the ARIN-PPML