[arin-ppml] Petition for Discussion of ARIN-prop-136
jcurran at arin.net
Mon Apr 18 21:09:30 EDT 2011
On Apr 18, 2011, at 8:37 PM, Benson Schliesser wrote:
> This is a fair comment. But I would suggest that an alternative structure doesn't exist because it hasn't been allowed to develop. We are in a catch-22 situation if we follow this logic: without an opt-out policy we have no alternative management regime, yet without an alternative management regime we cannot accept an opt-out policy.
I respectfully disagree. The alternate system can first be described
as a replacement global policy to ICANN's ICP-2. Upon recognition,
no "opt-out" policy would be needed, just as ARIN worked to transfer
registrations to LACNIC and AfriNIC upon their recognition.
> Please let me know if these comments answer your question, and/or if I can help clarify anything.
You wrote: "The intent of an opt-out is to remove oneself from the
imposition of ARIN policy." It would be best if this were clearly
stated in the policy (or even policy rationale). I note also that
the existing ICANN ICP-2 global policy states:
"Each region should be served by a single RIR, established under one
management and in one location. The establishment of multiple RIRs
in one region is likely to lead to:
• fragmentation of address space allocated to the region;
• difficulty for co-ordination and co-operation between the RIRs;
• confusion for the community within the region.
The internal administrative or membership structure of an RIR must
also not be such as to cause any of these effects. "
It appears that the proposal is in direct conflict with the above
requirements, and further may cause precisely the undesirable effects
proscribed by the global policy. Any language which can clarify this
to the contrary would be helpful.
President and CEO
More information about the ARIN-PPML