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

[Milton L Mueller]

The great thing about Geoff's article is that it calls for a neutral,
open administration of the registry function AND it calls attention to
the fact that our ability to maintain that administrative neutrality
depends on not overloading it with too many regulatory functions. This
is not a theoretical concern, as our experience with ICANN has shown
what happens when you try to load a huge number of regulatory functions
onto the simple act of coordinating the root zone file. If you like what
goes on with ICANN (including WSIS, a $70million annual budget, the
ongoing takeover by governments unrestrained by any international treaty
or due process, and all the other connections to sovereignty) then keep
trying to make the RIRs into full-fledged industry regulators via the
address registry allocation function. 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net [mailto:arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net]
On
> Behalf Of Scott Leibrand
> Sent: Sunday, October 19, 2008 9:48 PM
> To: Geoff Huston
> Cc: arin-ppml at arin.net
> Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Some observations on the differences in the
> various transfer policy proposals
> 
> Geoff,
> 
> In your article you imply that the RIRs' registry functions are not
the
> proper lever from which to apply the various regulatory functions that
the
> community has indicated are needed.  Where/how would you propose the
> regulatory function reside / be applied instead?
> 
> Or, to put a more practical face on the same question: how do you
propose
> that the industry deal with the deaggregation that will result from
the
> widespread transfer of small netblocks (as allowed under prop-50)?
> 
> I agree that restricting deaggregation through regulating access to
the
> registry will not be 100% effective, but it seems more likely to be
> effective than any alternative I've seen so far.
> 
> Thanks,
> Scott
> 
> Geoff Huston wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > At the ARIN meeting last week the question arose as to why the
various
> > policy proposals related to address transfers in the different RIRs
> > were so different. I made some comments in response to this question
> > from my perspective and then I had some followup questions mailed to
> > me, so I thought maybe there is some value in writing up from my
> > perspective. After all there is still some difference between the
> > proposal(s) before ARIN and Proposal-50 before APNIC, and  the
> > question as to why this difference exists is an interesting one.
> >
> > If you are interested its at: http://www.potaroo.net/ispcol/2008-
> 11/transfers.html
> >
> > thanks,
> >
> >     Geoff Huston
> >
> >     DIsclaimer: I'm speaking for myself, again!
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > PPML
> > 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:
> > http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
> > Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.
> _______________________________________________
> PPML
> 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:
> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
> Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.