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

[Tom Vest]

Hi Geoff,

Out of curiosity, can you think of any example of any policy or goal  
or imperative in any context where pure unencumbered choice, free from  
any material constraints and subject only to pure self-interest is the  
*only* driver -- and yet that goal or whatever is actually realized,  
i.e., enough to be something more than a hollow joke?

*Meaningful participation in any registry* is itself one of the  
conditions that you are proposing to transform into a completely  
unencumbered choice.

The IRRs are a great example, but not one that supports your point.

Thanks,

TV

On Oct 30, 2008, at 11:49 AM, Geoff Huston wrote:

> Thanks for your note David.
>
> You have noted that the analogy with a title office has parallels
> between deaggregation and subdivision, and the regulation of such
> deaggregation. I think you are making that point that a title office
> may be able to apply some constraint on deaggregation either by
> applying some regulatory constraint in its own right, or conforming to
> some third party acting in a regulatory capacity.
>
> The observation I made was that the ability of the registry to impose
> regulatory constraints was mitigated by its enforcement
> capability. When a registry imposes conditions that are not  
> universally
> accepted then alternate registries appear - the IRR story is a good
> example of registry proliferation and some aspects of attendant
> problems that this causes (http://www.nanog.org/meetings/nanog44/presentations/Tuesday/RAS_irrdata_N44.pdf
> ).
>
> I'm not arguing with the desireability of aggregation in the routing
> system, but what I have been saying is that the registry function in
> and of itself does not necessarily have the apropriate enforement
> ability, and that imposing such a burden on the registry in terms of
> access policies runs the distinct risk of heading down the path
> already travelled with route registries, which I personally do not
> think is a desireable path.
>
> kind regards,
>
>   Geoff Huston
>
>    Disclaimer : still speaking for myself, of course.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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.