[arin-ppml] Q2: on Address Transfers - Overkill on the freeze period?
sleibrand at internap.com
Fri Jun 20 20:06:41 EDT 2008
Milton L Mueller wrote:
> That's good, but I am also interested in reducing the "time out" to 2
> years total. I tend to think you only need one of those clauses, the
> second one, or if you retain both, make the time period one year.
I think we need both. Here's why:
"The transferor has not received any IPv4 allocations or assignments
from ARIN (through ordinary allocations or assignments, or through this
Simple Transfer policy) within the preceding 24 months."
This clause would prevent someone from getting space from ARIN, then
immediately turning around and transferring it for a profit. It also
deters hoarding by setting a minimum length on any "long" position.
"The transferor may not request any ordinary IPv4 allocations or
assignments from ARIN within the subsequent 24 months."
This clause would prevent someone from transferring their current
address holdings for a profit, then immediately turning around and
getting replacement space from ARIN.
I would, however, be amenable to changing all instances of "24 months"
in 8.3.1 and 8.3.2 to "12 months" (or something else), if people think
that'd be better.
Perhaps we could get some input from other folks on the best duration
for these "time out" clauses?
More information about the ARIN-PPML