[arin-ppml] Accusation of fundamental conflict of interest / IPaddress policy pitched directly to ICANN

[Mike Burns]

I would expect that the policies all new registries must follow will be 
established by IANA.
And as such, they would be global policies.
But just as existing global policies allow RIRs to have different transfer 
policies, all registries would be subject to IANA global policies.
Isn't there already policy somewhere which details global requirements for 
RIRs, within which they can have policy difference?

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "John Curran" <jcurran at arin.net>
To: "Mike Burns" <mike at nationwideinc.com>
Cc: "Keith W. Hare" <Keith at jcc.com>; <arin-ppml at arin.net>
Sent: Monday, May 02, 2011 11:32 AM
Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Accusation of fundamental conflict of interest / 
IPaddress policy pitched directly to ICANN


On May 2, 2011, at 5:14 PM, Mike Burns wrote:
> The new registry will have it's own transfer policies, for example, and 
> may be stricter or less strict than existing RIRs, which already differ in 
> transfer policies.

Mike -

  Could you elaborate?  If the structure of the Internet's number
  registry system were to evolve in some manner to accommodate new
  customer-facing "registries, wouldn't it be expected that such
  registries would operated according to overall global policies?
  (just as occurs in the DNS registry/registrar system today?)

Thanks!
/John

John Curran
President and CEO
ARIN