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

[Mike Burns]

Hi Kevin,

> I know that too, and I also know that if my family needs food and another 
> family needs food I am feeding mine first, then if I have any food left 
> over I will share.  I don't see the other RIR's making great strides to 
> prepare to share any IP space they have globally.

I understand the argument about using ARIN resources in ARIN territory. I 
think it may be a bit jingoistic, but I respect the argument.
It is a separate discussion though, from the needs test which was the issue 
I was raising with Owen.
I also believe that the free pool should be reserved for ARIN members and 
there should be protections against an end-run on the free pool through an 
Inter-RIR transfer policy.

>
>>
>> Basically you are holding those companies' justifiable need hostage to 
>> the
>> fears you have about market speculators and the like.
>>
>> Nevermind that there is no evidence of that speculation happening and
>> nevermind that APNIC has a real, honest need, and nevermind that ARIN has
>> the benefit of huge legacy allocations.
>
> Good! Hurrah!  If there is going to be no speculation then we can abandon 
> the whole IP market thing.
experience any issues.

My argument is that we cannot abandon the whole IP market thing. It is out 
of our control, because the limited power we have is in Whois and reverse 
naming.
We can't force network operators to route or not to route certain addresses, 
and I see no stomach at ARIN for challenging legacy transfers by revoking 
and reissuing their space.

So to think we have any significant power to prevent the rise of an IPv4 
market is naive. What we should do is acknowledge it and take the steps to 
transition ARIN from an arbiter of who gets addresses to a title-agency 
whose routing authority is respected enough to handle the challenges facing 
registration in the post-exhaust world.

Regards,
Mike