[arin-ppml] ARIN-prop-146 Clarify Justified Need for Transfers

Owen DeLong owen at delong.com
Thu May 5 19:08:06 EDT 2011

On May 5, 2011, at 3:42 PM, George Herbert wrote:

> On Thu, May 5, 2011 at 3:24 PM, Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com> wrote:
>> On May 5, 2011, at 3:17 PM, Matthew Kaufman wrote:
>>> On 5/5/2011 3:04 PM, Owen DeLong wrote:
>>>> True. What it does is remove the non-needers from the pool of people you
>>>> have to out-bid. What I don't understand is how adding non-needers to the
>>>> pool would help.
>>> Please clarify how Proposal 146 adds "non-needers" to the pool, as that certainly is not the intent of the policy proposal I wrote.
>>> Matthew Kaufman
>> Sorry... Conflation of multiple discussions....
>> Prop. 146 doesn't add non-needers, it adds optimistic speculative need.
> It refines the definition of speculation; all requests are at least 3
> month speculation or extrapolations now, and those of existing holders
> w/records are longer.  This just levels the bar (i.e., new entrants
> are more speculative, but we put their speculation on the same level
> as that of existing holders who are extrapolating).
It replaces three month speculation with 12 month speculation to place
it on what you call an equal footing with 12 month extrapolation.

> I'm not sure that I support 146 as written, but I think that the
> intent is good (level the playing field in terms of resource use time
> scale) as long as we ensure that there are reasonable limits to keep
> this useful to new entrants but not someone who's outright speculating
> / hoarding and not using.
The problem is that elevating speculation to the same level as
extrapolation of past performance in the evaluation of needs
basis strikes me not as a level playing field, but, rather tilting the
game in the opposite direction.


More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list