[arin-ppml] FW: Integrating Draft Policy ARIN-2011-1 into NRPM 8.3

[Bill Darte]

 Sorry, meant to copy the PPML on this response...
bd

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bill Darte 
> Sent: Friday, May 27, 2011 10:31 AM
> To: 'Martin Hannigan'
> Subject: RE: [arin-ppml] Integrating Draft Policy ARIN-2011-1 
> into NRPM 8.3
> 
>  Marty,
> See comments below...
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net
> > [mailto:arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net] On Behalf Of Martin Hannigan
> > Sent: Friday, May 27, 2011 10:13 AM
> > To: Mike Burns
> > Cc: ARIN-PPML List
> > Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Integrating Draft Policy ARIN-2011-1 into 
> > NRPM 8.3
> > 
> > On Fri, May 27, 2011 at 10:15 AM, Mike Burns 
> <mike at nationwideinc.com> 
> > wrote:
> > > Hi Bill,
> > >
> > > It's still not clear to me.
> > > Referencing "values" of an RFC is not terribly clarifying when 
> > > attempting to match transfer needs requirements which
> > already are out
> > > of sync with RFC2050's 1 year window.
> > 
> > Especially an RFC that was written in 1996. In fact, it 
> acknowledges 
> > this quite clearly:
> > 
> > "   It is in the interest of the Internet community as a 
> > whole that the
> >    above goals be pursued.  However it should be noted that
> >    "Conservation" and "Routability" are often conflicting 
> goals.  All
> >    the above goals may sometimes be in conflict with the 
> interests of
> >    individual end-users or Internet service providers.  
> > Careful analysis
> >    and judgement is necessary in each individual case to find an
> >    appropriate compromise."
> > 
> > The "values of 2050" is a dead issue IMHO. The idea of inter-RIR 
> > transfer should go back to the drawing board entirely. Both 
> interest 
> > and opinion have grown significantly and the path that this 
> proposal 
> > is taking does not reflect that. Trying to adjust it 
> midstream to rush 
> > something in is a grave error all considered.
> 
> I believe that the efforts to date have been serious and the 
> PDP is the mechanism through which current need is assessed 
> in the ARIN region, DP 2011-1 is in the phase for discussion 
> and compromise and your input along with all other is important.
> 
> 
> > 
> > I'm not in favor of this approach, or any approach that has 
> presented 
> > to date.
> 
> The 'approach' that you refer to is related to and Inter-RIR 
> transfer itself, the 'values of 2050', the RIR's agreement, 
> needs basis for tansfer?  
> 
> I'm unsure of exactly what you are requesting when you say 
> "back to the drawing board"...as I believe that we are at the 
> drawing board related to Inter-RIR transfers of IPv4 resources.
> 
> bd
> 
> > 
> > Best,
> > 
> > -M<
> > _______________________________________________
> > PPML
> > You are receiving this message because you are subscribed 
> to the ARIN 
> > Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML at arin.net).
> > Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
> > http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
> > Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.
> >