[arin-ppml] Fairness of banning IPv4 allocations to some category of organization

[Fred Baker]

It's a very reasonable thing to discuss. I suspect that the matter  
will ease the transition more and be more generally acceptable if it  
is handled the way I suggested earlier: discriminate not in favor of  
long-standing customers (which ARIN member will not argue that it has  
been a long-standing customer?) but in favor of those who are  
demonstrably moving their businesses to the next generation technology.

On Oct 6, 2009, at 2:16 PM, <michael.dillon at bt.com> wrote:

>
> I was just reading a legal opinion that RIPE has received related to
> rationing policies for the final IANA allocations to RIRs. There
> was an interesting paragraph there that I believe substantially
> applies in North America, and which is worth thinking about:
>
>   A shortage of supply is indeed generally recognized as an
>   objective justification for a dominant company to discriminate
>   between its customers. In such cases, which applies to IPv4
>   address space, a dominant firm may e.g. prioritise long-
>   standing customers over new or occasional customers and the
>   Commission (EU) will limit its investigation to verifying that
>   there is a genuine shortage and that the reduction in supplies
>   is not merely a pretext for a downright abusive refusal to supply.
>
> Obviously, any policy proposed within ARIN would get its own legal
> review and we would see how the specific wording of such a policy
> would be viewed under the specific laws of the USA and Virginia.
> That is not the point.
>
> The point is that we have a REAL shortage looming of IPv4 addresses
> and that network operators are not yet ready to use IPv6 addresses
> as a substitute. That is a genuine shortage of supply, and I believe
> that it is justification for policies which specifically target
> new entrants. Whether the policies only target smart utility
> networks, or whether they go further and target any new entrants,
> I think that there is sufficient reason to think that such
> policies would pass muster.
>
> Therefore, I would like to see us discuss this type of policy now,
> while there is still some chance of easing the IPv6 transition,
> if only a little bit.
>
> -------------------------------------------------------
> Michael Dillon
> GFS Network Addressing Authority - BT Innovation & Design
> 66 Prescot St., London, E1 8HG, UK
> Mobile: +44 7900 823 672  BTNet 660 3360
> Internet: michael.dillon at bt.com
> Phone: +44 131312 3360  Fax: +44 20 7650 9030
> http://www.btradianz.com
>
> Use the wiki: http://collaborate.bt.com/wiki
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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.