[arin-ppml] Draft Policy 2011-1 - Inter-RIR Transfers - Shepherd's Inquiry

[William Herrin]

On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 12:34 PM, Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com> wrote:
> On Jun 21, 2011, at 9:25 AM, William Herrin wrote:
>> Oppose.
>>
>> 1. "compatible needs-based policies" is too vague to enforce.
>> Including "needs-based" is nothing more than a poison pill aimed at
>> APNIC but even if you take that out, how the heck is ARIN supposed to
>> determine when another region's policies are "compatible?" The focus
>> belongs on the registrant who either meets both registries' policies
>> for receiving addresses or he doesn't.
>>
> The problem with that approach is that it doesn't prevent the target
> registrant from subsequently transferring the addresses according only
> to the local RIR's policy and then coming back for another inter-RIR
> transfer.

Hi Owen,

Then that problem exists in ARIN policy and should be corrected in
ARIN policy so that ARIN considers the disposition of all current and
previously allocated resources when approving a new one. Otherwise
you're asking folks in other regions to meet a higher standard than
folks in our own region.


>> 2. The timing of this proposal is bad. Pushing this policy prior to
>> the exhaustion of ARIN's free pool invites an out-region address grab.
>> This draft policy belongs on next year's agenda when the only
>> addresses left to move are registrant to registrant transfers.
>>
> There is at least one region where this is already the case. As such,
> the policy is timely now.

There's a region in which ARIN's free pool is exhausted? Which one?

Regards,
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