[arin-ppml] ARIN-prop-136 Services Opt-out Allowed for Unaffiliated Address Blocks

[Benson Schliesser]

Hi, Keith.

On Feb 23, 2011, at 10:29 PM, Keith W. Hare wrote:

> I am opposed to prop-136.
> 
> Prop-136 is dancing around the edges of the real question of whether the ARIN community wants to give up on participant-driven policies and needs-based resource allocations in favor of money-based allocations and for-profit corporate policies.

I don't think prop-136 dances around the issue: it deals with it directly, for legacy holders in the ARIN region, by allowing them to opt-out of ARIN regulation.

> If Mr. Schliesser really thinks that some number of for-profit registry services are a better way to handle IPv4 address allocations (or assignments) then he should write a proposal to do that. Such a proposal would allow the ARIN community to discuss the merits of such a change, rather than spending time on intermediate steps and side issues.

I agree that we need a discussion of the for-profit registry question.  And I don't expect it to be an easy one, similar to how unfriendly at times the debate over domain names monetization was.

However, I think it's perfectly reasonable to answer the question of regulatory authority first.  If the ARIN community rejects both prop-133 and prop-136 then we are effectively saying that legacy holders have "no option" but to submit to ARIN regulation.  In either event, a discussion of for-profit registry services would have a different foundation and tone.

Moreover, while the question of regulatory authority will impact a discussion of for-profit registry services, address trading markets, etc, it is actually a larger fundamental question.  I agree that we should discuss the issues you raise, but please don't lose sight of the actual policy text and meaning.

Cheers,
-Benson