[arin-ppml] ARIN-prop-156 Update 8.3 to allow inter-RIR transfers

[Mike Burns]

>Mike -

>If that was the case, it is because of failure of the registrants to
>update their records.  I will note the ARIN community has since
>directed ARIN to send POC Update messages to all resources holders,
>and that is underway now.  We are seeing very good response rates
>for updates (as high as 36% response rate) but that does not help
>for legacy resources that presently have no points-of-contact with
>valid contact information.

>Having correct information in the Whois database is quite straight
>forward for those who wish to do so, and I encourage the community
>to adopt policies that support accurate registration data.  Only
>the community can decide if it is worthwhile to set aside other
>policy goals in the pursuit of having minimal criterial for ARIN
>to process requests (such as transfers).

>FYI,
>/John

Hi John,

Yes, I agree that only the community can determine whether the continuation 
of a needs-based policy based on the stewards' goals of conservation is 
appropriate for transfers which do not involve free pool addresses.

I disagree with your depiction of the stewards' choice as whether to "set 
aside" other policy goals. The only goal relevant here is the goal of 
conservation. I don't think recognizing that the goal of conservation will 
now be met by market forces is the same as setting it aside. It's more of a 
"sunsetting" than a setting aside.

That's a minor quibble, I appreciate your statement of support for the 
community adopting policies which support accurate registration data, which 
prop-151 is designed to do, and which Scott's prop-156 is designed to do.

RFC 2050 4.1 says Regional Registries provide registration services as its 
primary function.

Let's adopt policies which support our primary function, and receive the 
attendant benefits of global comity, parity between all address holders, and 
maintenance of existing self-governance.

Regards,

Mike