[arin-ppml] 2008-6: Emergency Transfer Policy for IPv4 Addresses
BillD at cait.wustl.edu
Tue Sep 30 15:51:49 EDT 2008
Thanks for being on topic with your response Chris.
You are correct....about ARIN as an intermediary. Arin not a 'transfer
intermediary' is perhaps better....if at all.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Chris Grundemann [mailto:cgrundemann at gmail.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, September 30, 2008 1:59 PM
> To: Bill Darte
> Cc: arin-ppml at arin.net
> Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] 2008-6: Emergency Transfer Policy
> for IPv4 Addresses
> Comments on 2008-6:
> 0) Basic disclosure; I am still very much on the fence about
> a liberalized transfer policy in general but I want to make
> sure that if I do end up on the yes side of that fence, there
> is an acceptable policy available =).
> 1) "For a period of 3 years from policy implementation,
> transfer of ARIN IPv4 addresses between two entities in the
> ARIN region, without the active involvement of ARIN as an
> intermediary, will be considered legitimate and will be
> documented accordingly under the following conditions:"
> Does "without the active involvement of ARIN as an
> intermediary," mean that if ARIN does act as an intermediary
> the transfer will not be considered legitimate? I believe
> this was explained previously to be taken as a distinction
> from the current process of an organization returning
> unneeded space to ARIN and that space being subsequently
> allocated by ARIN to another organization. In any case I
> find it slightly confusing and unnecessary, maybe it is a
> quibble but I would strike it.
> 2) I think that there should be one further condition added.
> A constraint on the transferor barring the transfer of
> recently acquired IPv4. I believe that this is a simple and
> necessary precaution against pure IP dealers/speculators etc
> emerging and potentially poisoning any legitimate market that
> does emerge.
> 3) In contrast to 2008-2, the benefit of this proposal is its
> simplicity and the stated intention that it be held in
> reserve until such time as the board deems it absolutely
> necessary (of course the latter could easily be applied to
> 2008-2 as well). Focusing on the former; I believe that the
> simplicity is a benefit because if such a time arises that
> the need for a more liberal transfer policy is evident, that
> policy's effectiveness will hinge upon organizations actually
> following it. What I really don't want is a liberalized
> transfer policy that is ignored in favor of a more
> efficacious black market.
> 4) The negative is that I do see merit in most of the
> detailed restrictions written into 2008-2 and I fear that
> should 2008-6 ever be adopted the policy process may be too
> slow to react to problems that arose in the created market.
> At this time I feel that this negative aspect is outweighed
> by the need to keep such a policy easy to follow and by the
> fact that we really do not know what problems will need
> addressing in an IP market so trying to address them all now
> may very well be futile.
> These comments are mine alone and are subject to change with
> or without further notice 8-) ~Chris
> On Mon, Sep 29, 2008 at 9:00 AM, Bill Darte
> <BillD at cait.wustl.edu> wrote:
> > As the Oct 15 ARIN Public Policy Meeting comes closer, I
> would like to
> > again ask anyone who has not commented (or sufficiently) on this
> > policy proposal to do so. Especially, I am interested in what you
> > think are the positive or negative aspects of this proposal in
> > contrast to 2008-2 the more elaborate and detailed proposal.
> > 2008-6 was promulgated as an alternative to 2008-6 for those who
> > believe that 1./ a more liberal transfer policy is in the best
> > interest of the industry and, 2./ feel that it would be
> easier to pass
> > it and then modify it as needed in the future, should
> 2008-2 fail to
> > gain consensus across all of its nuance.
> > As always, I thank you for your involvement and insight into the
> > policy evaluation process of ARIN. Your participation
> makes the role
> > of the AC much easier and the overall process more rigorous.
> > Bill Darte
> > ARIN Advisory Council
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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.
> Chris Grundemann
More information about the ARIN-PPML