[arin-ppml] the Transfer Policy Argument Space
owen at delong.com
Wed Sep 3 20:36:42 EDT 2008
On Sep 3, 2008, at 5:14 PM, John Curran wrote:
> On Sep 3, 2008, at 6:35 PM, Owen DeLong wrote:
>> I, for one, would very much love to hear a direct answer to 4e and
>> the subsequent opposing question from Steve Ryan. My impression
>> so far is that they are approximately equal, but, I do not feel like
>> I have received any clear indication from Steve on this.
>> OTOH, I suspect that it may be very hard for Steve to do so as these
>> could be very uncertain.
> Owen -
> I'm not Steve Ryan (and he's thankful of that :-), but let
> me pose a thought exercise which may provide some insight
> into question 4e and its converse...
True. Worse yet, to the best of my knowledge, you, like me,
do not have a JD and so we're both somewhat underqualified
to answer the question at hand which is why I put Steve
on the spot.
> At a point in time when ARIN has effectively no remaining
> available space to satisfy requests under the current IPv4
> policy space, how should ARIN best fulfill its incorporation
> duties to "to enhance the growth of the Internet .. by
> encouraging the exploration and implementation of solutions
> to Internet Protocol number scarcity issues"? For instance,
> how would two parties seeking to transfer IPv4 address space
> (e.g. an address holder who could free up significant address
> space through consolidation efforts, and an ISP constrained by
> their inability to obtain additional IPv4 number resources)
> view ARIN's fulfillment of its duties if there is neither a
> more relaxed transfer policy nor a clear community statement
> of why such a policy is undesirable?
1. I'm all for a clear community statement of why such a policy
is undesirable. I would argue that if a relaxed transfer policy
fails to achieve consensus, then, that's a clear statement
from the community THAT such a thing is undesirable, all
that is left is to fill in the why. There have been a number of
reasons posted to this list, many of which are quite legitimate.
I'm not necessarily hard opposed to a transfer policy, but, the
more we delve into the attempts to compensate for the downsides
to such a thing, the more convinced I have become that it is
a quagmire and a slippery slope leading to the quagmire.
2. I think ARIN could best fulfill its role through good stewardship
and an outreach program which provided encouragement
and viable incentives/assistance/etc. to get people with excess
IP available to return it to the free pool for ARIN to properly
exercise stewardship in recycling it rather than to allow
an ad-hoc transfer environment that assures money becomes
the sole mechanism by which we regulate who gets IPv4 address
space in the future.
More information about the ARIN-PPML