[arin-ppml] Draft Policy 2010-10 (Global Proposal): Global Policy for IPv4 Allocations by the IANA Post Exhaustion - Last Call (text revised)

Matthew Petach mpetach at netflight.com
Fri Nov 5 18:54:49 EDT 2010

I actually just have one question that's really about the subject
matter at hand; apologies in advance for drifting off topic back
to the original post.  :(

On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 9:40 AM, ARIN <info at arin.net> wrote:
> 6. No Transfer Rights
> Address space assigned from the Reclamation Pool may be transferred if
> there is either an ICANN Board ratified global policy or globally
> coordinated RIR policy specifically written to deal with transfers
> whether inter-RIR or from one entity to another. Transfers must meet the
> requirements of such a policy. In the absence of such a policy, no
> transfers of any kind related to address space allocated or assigned
> from the reclamation pool is allowed.

ARIN has a specified transfer listing service, and currently allows
for transfers within its region.  Is there a particular reason we need to
split address space into two categories, that which can be transferred
and that which cannot?  Why does the date on which address space
is allocated or assigned determine whether or not the space can ever
be transferred, in perpetuity?

We already have mechanisms in place to prevent abuse within the
transfer policy; I see no reason to artificially create two different
categories of address space like this.

I would support this policy, with the adjustment of section 6 to allow
for RIR-based transfer policies, like the one currently present in the
ARIN region; trying to develop a coordinated transfer policy across
all regions, all RIRs I consider to be an unnecessary burden on
this proposal.

And now, you may return to your current rant-filled thread.  ^_^;


More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list