[arin-ppml] IPv4 Transfer Policy Change to Keep Whois Accurate

McTim dogwallah at gmail.com
Sat May 21 03:34:07 EDT 2011


Apologies for the length of this posting.

On Fri, May 20, 2011 at 10:56 PM, Mike Burns <mike at nationwideinc.com> wrote:
> Hello to the list,


> arrayed above? Any large loopholes or gotchas? Risks or threats we haven't
> considered?

In November, at the AfriNIC meeting, I gave a presentation on
"Emerging Threats to the RIR system".

You can find that one here:


This proposal has outlined a more serious threat than any in my
presentation, that is the threat of removing the need any need for a

I think we are on a very slippery slope to a dystopic future in which
all access to IP addresses (v4 or v6) are done on a "cash n carry"
basis.  Currently, we are near the top of that steep and slippery
slide, sitting on a sturdy branch (which we call "needs-basis" or TV's
"capability" testing) of a stout tree (species STLS).

The next ledge down is where APNIC sits. They call it prop-050.  Below
that we can see other ledges and trees where we might stop on the way
down, including the shelf of inter-RIR transfer, the slender branch of
 RIR verification,  etc, etc, all the way down into the festering
swamp of de-aggregation.

Put another way STLS-->removal of needs basis-->removal of RIR
involvement in transfers/addition of private registries--> full
commoditisation of v4-->commoditisation of v6-->removal of any needs
to have policy-->elimination of IP address policy communities/PDPs.

There will always be folk who will argue for the purest form of a
"free-market", which as we know is mostly theoretical.  Once v4 is
fully commoditised, there will inevitably be folk who want to do the
same to v6.  I can hear the arguments now "hey if we can buy and sell
v4, why not v6, after all they are the same thing, they are both IP
addresses, no?"

Once we have fully commoditised all IP resources (including ASNs BTW),
 then what is the point of having PDPs or RIR communities to engage in
same?  If you remove the regulator, and the rule governing IP address
distribution is "the one with the deepest pocket wins", then there is
no need for a rule making community.

In another forum, I have used the acronym BUTOC to describe the
Bottom-Up, Transparent, Open, Consensus driven Internet PDPs or what
ISOC calls the Internet Ecosystem.

http://www.isoc.org/pubpolpillar/docs/factsheet_ecosystem_20090310.pdf  says:

"The Internet is successful in large part due to its unique model:
shared global ownership, development based on open standards, and
freely accessible processes for technology and policy development. The
Internet’s unprecedented success continues to thrive because the
Internet model is open, transparent, and collaborative. The model
relies on processes and products that are local, bottom-up, and
accessible to users around the world"

Now, if this is true, (which I believe it is), eliminating the
underpinnings of this model would be detrimental to the development of
the Internet.

We have already commoditised IP connectivity, let's not commoditise IP


"A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A
route indicates how we get there."  Jon Postel

More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list