[arin-ppml] Can a personal property approach evertransitionintomulti-stakeholder, private sector led, bottom-up policydevelopment model?

[John Curran]

On Apr 28, 2011, at 6:50 PM, Mike Burns wrote:

> Hi John,
> 
> The entire system isn't behaving consistently now.
> APNIC does not require justification for transfers, ARIN does.
> 
> My request to drop justifications for all transfers would make our policy more consistent with APNIC, whose region has the largest demand and the lowest stockpiles.
> 
> This request does not require any global coordination that I can see, and failing to move to liberalize markets will only serve to increase the disjointedness of the system.
> 
> Mind you I am in support of global changes that occur at the IANA or ICANN Levels that would also serve to liberalize transfer markets, but do not see those efforts as mutually exclusive to ARIN's ability to change policy now to conform to the least-common-denominator of market freedom, which is currently APNIC.


Mike - 
 
  My apologies for being unclear.  There is nothing wrong with 
  the ARIN region making any policies it deems appropriate.  

  I meant only that an overall decision regarding "hastening 
  the demise of IPv4" versus "creating conditions which allow 
  as many IPv4 addresses as possible to be brought into use" 
  are the types of decision that may not bring about the desired
  result unless applied consistently on a global basis.

  That should not prevent us from trying as the community deems
  most appropriate, but just recognizing a decision to affect
  the transition of entire protocol suites may require global
  action for maximum effect.

FYI,
/John

John Curran
President and CEO
ARIN