[arin-ppml] Accusation of fundamental conflictofinterest/IPaddresspolicy pitched directly to ICANN
jeffrey.lyon at blacklotus.net
Mon May 2 16:10:43 EDT 2011
On Mon, May 2, 2011 at 4:02 PM, Mike Burns <mike at nationwideinc.com> wrote:
> Now you would ask ARIN not only whether the addresses are justified in their
> opinion, but also to judge the financial motivations of the participants?
> Under what policy would ARIN be able to have legacy addresses returned to
> the free pool as you describe?
> In fact, the MS/Nortel deal is not the only transaction that has occurred,
> and the existence of tradeipv4.com and other sites is testimony to the
> likelihood it will happen again, policy or no policy.
> Who knows which 80 companies were contacted? Wouldn't it be better if the
> whole thing was conducted in the open, so that ChinaTelecom could bid as
> Why not an open and transparent marketplace free from artifical and
> easily-scammable justification regimes?
> In fact one could very succinctly argue that precisely this example
> could/should trigger the ARIN / ICANN community to now officially adopt a
> tighter /explicit policy like example #7 I mentioned.
> 7) Ask ARIN to prevent any and all transfers that are motivated purely by
> financial gain, and instead insist that such participants return IPv4
> allocations to the unallocated pool "for the benefit of the Internet
> Community" once the existing allocation is no longer needed.
> 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:
> Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.
Why would ARIN want to allow sales of space outside the region?
Jeffrey Lyon, Leadership Team
jeffrey.lyon at blacklotus.net | http://www.blacklotus.net
Black Lotus Communications - AS32421
First and Leading in DDoS Protection Solutions
More information about the ARIN-PPML