[arin-ppml] Some observations on the differences in the various transfer policy proposals

[Geoff Huston]

Hi Scott,

I'm pretty sure that what I was saying was not working for you, and  
maybe rephrasing my thoughts might possibly help.

What I'm trying to say is that attempting to place the registry on a  
course of saving the Internet from all kinds of dire perils in  
routing, address speculation, unfairness, and such, with only a  
registry function to work with to achieve this is pretty high risk  
path to take, in my opinion.

[Press delete now if you're already drowning with the volume on the  
ppml list! The rest of this note just expands upon this argument.]

When there are no more allocations to be made there is no de facto  
monopoly of the RIRs. The registry function is not one that is the  
unique prerogative of the RIRs to operate - quite the opposite, and,  
as we've already seen with the proliferation of IRRs, when you don't  
like the policies or practices associated with using one registry you  
can always use another! Yes, I appreciate that these are heretical  
thoughts. It would be good to believe that the RIRs will continue to  
have some enforcement authority in this space that could allow the  
inclusion of a broader agenda related to mitigating some of the worst  
risks in address transfers and markets, but, frankly, I personally  
don't find such assertions of enforcement authority at all comforting  
or even credible.

If access to the registry has onerous constraints and conditions, the  
registry runs the risk of annoying the registry's customers. And while  
the address allocation function is a de facto monopoly, registries are  
not. Registries can come and go in the blink of an eye. If a registry  
manages to alienate its customers then the most obvious response is  
that other registries, with more neutral stances, will emerge and at  
that point address chaos is only a short step further down that track.


thanks,

     Geoff

     Disclaimer: These are all my opinions, totally.