[arin-ppml] "Leasing" of space via non-connectivity providers (was: Re: And so it ends... )
hannigan at gmail.com
Sun Feb 6 18:46:30 EST 2011
On Sun, Feb 6, 2011 at 10:30 AM, Jack Bates <jbates at brightok.net> wrote:
> On 2/5/2011 11:32 PM, Benson Schliesser wrote:
>> The specified transfer service, in its current form, is not sufficient to
>> facilitate efficient distribution. A less-regulated market would be much
>> more dynamic and appealing to buyers and sellers, especially at this stage.
> The problem, i believe, with a less-regulated market is that we'd see much
> smaller address block transfers, which would jeopardize core routing (as if
> it's not going to be bad enough). A lot of individual /24 transfers could
> prove very dangerous for us, while the parties involved in such transfers
> may not understand or care about the problem. Removing ARIN completely would
> destroy what use is left in the whois database.
> One of the stated goals of ARIN is to protect routing tables from bloat,
> which is reflected in the minimum requirements to receive an allocation.
> This doesn't, in practice, actually protect the tables, as there are many
> who deaggregate their allocations, but that is beyond the control of ARIN.
I think that network operators are better suited to manage this as
part of a market activity than a "regulation" devised by ARIN.
Historically, "regulation" of routing has been considered operational
and ARIN policy in this area is generally ignored.
More information about the ARIN-PPML