[arin-ppml] Some observations on the differences in the various transfer policy proposals
Geoff Huston
gih at apnic.net
Mon Oct 20 15:08:09 EDT 2008
On 21/10/2008, at 4:29 AM, Scott Leibrand wrote:
> I understand your position there, but you haven't answered my
> question: who/what do you think is in a better position than the
> RIRs to do so?
I think you are saying "I want you to show me your concept of The
Complete Solution."
I am saying "In my view the registry function in and of itself is
incapable of carrying the load of The Complete Solution, whatever that
may be - if you overload the registry with contrived constraints on
how one can make changes in the registry you simply motivate the
creation of alternate registries, and then rather than having a
valuable and useful registry for the IPv4 Internet you have, well,
fatal confusion. There are many good and compelling reasons to get
over this IPv4 exhaustion thing and deploy IPv6, but I'm personally
not keen on an approach that includes destruction of the integrity of
the entire address registry structure as a major milestone."
It should be pretty clear that your question was not a question I was
addressing. I'm not even sure that I can - when you look at the
extraordinary breath of the global Internet industry, the massive
diversity and size of the interests that are bought to bear on it, the
diverse motivations and perceptions of value, the range of
stakeholders and the manner of their interaction and the evolving
roles and responsibility of regulatory measures in this environment,
its pretty clear that we are within a rather complex system. I
personally would be very skeptical of any claim of complete
understanding of this environment, but maybe thats just me!
At which point I've already gone past acceptable levels of brevity in
mail, and way past my personal quota of posts - my sincere apologies
for this.
Geoff
Disclaimer: Who am I? Oh right, I'm me! And thats who I'm
speaking for!
More information about the ARIN-PPML
mailing list