[arin-ppml] ARIN / Microsoft press release regarding IP address Transfers

[McTim]

<originally sent offlist by error-reposting to PPML>

Hi,

On Sat, Apr 16, 2011 at 11:42 PM, Matthew Kaufman <matthew at matthew.at> wrote:
>
>
>
> On Apr 16, 2011, at 12:54 PM, John Curran <jcurran at arin.net> wrote:
>
>> On Apr 16, 2011, at 3:38 PM, "Matthew Kaufman" <matthew at matthew.at> wrote:
>>
>>> On Apr 16, 2011, at 11:13 AM, John Curran <jcurran at arin.net> wrote:
>>>
>>> And so the open and transparent IPv4 transfer market opens.
>>
>> Correct.
>>
>
> I was being sarcastic. There's almost nothing open or transparent about this.


Is any transaction between ARIN (or any of the RIRs) and members "open
and transparent"?

Do you want to be looking over the shoulders of the staff over every
transaction?

Do you want the world to know every detail of every request for
resources that you make?

How about for every assignment you make to customers, shouldn't they
be subject to the same transparency you seem to seek in this one case?

I suspect your answers to all of the above to be "No".  If so, why do
you want to know about this one, because it is in the news?  If your
answers are "Yes", you are welcome to write a policy proposal to that
effect.

<snip>

>
> As someone else said, we are just supposed to trust that policies were followed to the letter.

As is the case in all allocations/assignments/transfers.

I've just run across this, which may (or may not) explain the needs of
MSN in this case:

http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/press/2006/jul06/07-18UCGNortelPR.mspx

In any case, It doesn't matter.

Either ALL transactions with ARIN are confidential, or none of them
are, I suggest that you can't have it both ways.

--
Cheers,

McTim
"A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A
route indicates how we get there."  Jon Postel



-- 
Cheers,

McTim
"A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A
route indicates how we get there."  Jon Postel