[arin-ppml] Revised -- Policy Proposal 2009-4: IPv4 Recovery Fund

[Randy Bush]

i have been keeping out of this unbelievable poolpah.  but you've been a
sane on eover the years and your simple message just caught me.

> This is why I supported 2008-6.  It is simple and unambiguous.   Most of
> the arguments that you've made in support of 2009-4 also apply to 2008-6
> and the latter has the advantage that it's exactly two sentences long.  

even if i disagreed with a policy, that the arin culture could produce a
policy that was only two sentences would warrant a standing ovation.

in this case, one can actually read and understand it.  undoubtedly the
folk in the black helicopters can find holes, nothing is without holes [0].

> my vote is to keep ARIN out of the middle of transfers.  In my
> opinion, ARIN's goal should be to make the database as accurate as
> possible, and very little else; take the time and money that would be
> spent playing matchmaker and use it to validate POC data or promote v6
> instead.

eminently sensible.

randy

-- 

[0] - a week or so ago, on the apnic policy mailing list, andy linton
      said, in
      <http://www.apnic.net/mailing-lists/sig-policy/archive/2009/04/msg00001.html>
      "I'd still like to see us proceed with what we've already got
      consensus on and trust the hostmasters at APNIC to "do the right
      thing"."

      and he refers to <http://www.nkarten.com/sla.html#avoidjic> which
      is good advice for dealing with black helicopters.