[arin-ppml] Use of "reserved" address space.

[Lee Howard]

From: Roger Marquis <marquis at roble.com>

> Thanks for the pointer John.   The crux of this impasse, however, is the
> community vote.  Those with a financial interest in address exhaustion
> and their proxies currently have a majority.  Even something as clean as
> Proposal 112 doesn't stand a chance.

Huh?  Are you saying that there are people who eagerly anticipate the
exhaustion for financial reasons?   I don't know who that might be; I
see only advocacy for IPv6 and apathy about runout.
You will find Board and AC members strongly encouraging IPv6; see 
past Board statements.  

The AC described its reasons for abandoning 112:

The AC abandoned Proposal 112 "Utilization of 10.4.2 resources only via
  explicit policy" due to the proposed added restrictions to be placed
upon the resource allocation process. Additionally, there was not much
support on the PPML.
This decision was petitioned, but still failed to find support.  The
petition process doesn't require a majority (which would be impossible
if your suggestion were true), only that ten people from different
organizations agree (https://www.arin.net/policy/pdp.html).  If there
aren't ten people who agree, is it worth discussing further?

You should submit a new policy proposal.  Terse is good, but clear
is better.  Any AC member will be happy to help you wordsmith it
so you get a good start.  Find one at https://www.arin.net/about_us/ac.html

Lee


      
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20100630/63f99ca5/attachment.htm>