[arin-ppml] ARIN-2011-6: Returned IPv4 Addresses - Last Call

William Herrin bill at herrin.us
Fri Apr 22 13:27:38 EDT 2011

On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 6:50 PM, Charles O'Hern <charles at office.tcsn.net> wrote:
> On 4/19/11 10:50 AM, William Herrin wrote:
>> We don't want addresses returned to IANA. Period. Unconditionally.
> What Bill wrote pretty much sums up what I meant by "locked".  I realize
> there is work on Regional transfers underway, but I don't see that in
> NRPM yet.  The original language for 2011-6 would appear to prevent
> addresses being available for Regional transfers anyways.
> I oppose the absolutism stated by Bill's statement and inferred by
> the original language of 2011-6.

Hi Charles,

You understand: no policy is immutable. Every policy is subject to
change by the next one. No matter what words you use, every proposal
implicitly appends the phrase, "for now."

In my opinion, we have a strong consensus that we should not return
addresses to IANA, "for now." There is no consensus on specific
conditions under which that should change. That's why I oppose
expressing such conditions in the new verbiage. At best its redundant
to the implicit "for now" and it smells like the kind of thing that
could have unintended consequences.

I would not, however, object to the original proposal plus some
explanatory language that, "this policy is intended to be reconsidered
later." Still redundant, but its a neutral statement that doesn't
express false consensus.

Bill Herrin

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

More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list