[arin-ppml] Proposal 2011-6

[William Herrin]

On Thu, Apr 7, 2011 at 10:23 AM, Chris Grundemann <cgrundemann at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 7, 2011 at 14:20, cja at daydream.com <packetgrrl at gmail.com> wrote:
>> http://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/2011-March/020432.html
>
>  1. Proposal Summary (Staff Understanding):
>
>  This policy proposal would require ARIN to retain any address space that
>  is or has been returned, revoked or recovered for redistribution to
>  customers within the ARIN region, except where otherwise directed by
>  policy.

Thanks Cathy, Chris,

I'm satisfied with and support the proposal as understood by staff but
if I ever hear, "It doesn't say we can't return addresses to IANA,"
you're gonna get a big fat "I told you so."


On Thu, Apr 7, 2011 at 11:28 AM, Alexander, Daniel
<Daniel_Alexander at cable.comcast.com> wrote:
> It is understandable that people would want IPv4 resources to stay in the
> region when they are scarce. But what happens when the ARIN region starts to
> reach parity with IPv6 services? IPv4 resources will start to lose their
> urgency in this region, but will still be needed in others.

Daniel,

What happens is this: someone complains that they could really use our
no longer needed IPv4 addresses and writes a policy proposal to allow
them to be transferred out-region.

> Does anyone consider this hoarding?

If you buy the last loaf of bread and then _eat it,_ is it hoarding?

> If another region were
> to exhibit similar behavior, this region would be quite vocal in
> opposition.

Other regions do engage in behavior we disapprove of. By and large, we
get over it. The alternative is ICANN runs things and we all lose.

Regards,
Bill


-- 
William D. Herrin ................ herrin at dirtside.com  bill at herrin.us
3005 Crane Dr. ...................... Web: <http://bill.herrin.us/>
Falls Church, VA 22042-3004