[arin-ppml] clarification of Board actions Feb 2 and Mar 18, 2009

McTim dogwallah at gmail.com
Tue Mar 31 00:51:14 EDT 2009

On 3/31/09, Ted Mittelstaedt <tedm at ipinc.net> wrote:
> > The
>  > Board has been concerned for some time that the lack of a
>  > liberalized transfer policy would create legal risk: that we
>  > had not provided a mechanism to improve the efficient
>  > utilization of previously-allocated resources, and that this
>  > risk was significant enough to jeopardize ARIN's ability to
>  > fulfill its stewardship mission.
>  >
> I have been saying this same thing for years and this is
>  why I proposed the POC cleanup.  HOWEVER it must be clear that
>  this statement presumes that the legal risk is created by
>  the lack of a liberalized transfer policy.  This is a fundamentally
>  flawed argument.  The legal risk is NOT created by this,
>  the legal risk is created by INSUFFICIENT utilization of
>  assignable IPv4.
>  The fear argument goes something like this:
>  When IPv4 runs out some large cash-rich org will request a
>  block and be denied.  That org will then spend it's money
>  lobbying it's nation's government that the RIR's know that
>  there's lots of available IPv4 tied up in old assignments that
>  aren't being used, and that because ARIN has the bulk of it,
>  and ARIN hasn't done enough to scavenge out this stale addressing,
>  that ARIN is no longer functioning, and that the U.N. needs
>  to assign a committee - like WIPO was done with the DNS
>  system - to interfere and take control of the assignment
>  mechanism away from ARIN.

..and they will be doing this with a fleet of black helicopters
landing in Chantilly?



More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list