[arin-ppml] ARIN-2011-1: ARIN Inter-RIR Transfers - Last Call

[William Herrin]

On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 6:43 PM, David Farmer <farmer at umn.edu> wrote:
> Additionally, I think we really need to give some serious thought about some
> of the technical issue around IPv6, especially regarding issues like sparse
> allocation, but I'm sure there are others too.  These could be tricky in
> region, but they are even more tricky transferring out of region.  Like, do
> we transfer to the other RIR only the registered block, the registered block
> plus the next 1,2, or 3 nibbles?  Especially in IPv6 we could create
> consequences that we have to live with for a very long time.  I'd rather not
> rush that discussion.
>
> Even more, I'd rather not block inter-region IPv4 transfers with that
> discussion.


Hi David,

I have no particular objection to considering 8.2 style inter-region
transfers separately from 8.3 style transfers. Nevertheless, that's
one of a number of material differences between the draft presented at
the meeting and the draft presented today.

I don't want to belabor the point, so I'll try to confine my following
messages to issues and suggestions for the draft language itself, but
the bottom line is this: I think you guys need to request a ruling
from counsel as to whether language changes of this magnitude are
permissible within the section 4 portion of the PDP process as
published. As I read the PDP, non-cosmetic change requires a return to
the AC's docket, i.e. PDP section 2. And with proposed changes this
significant on a topic of such controversy, I'm inclined to hold your
feet to the fire.

Regards,
Bill Herrin


-- 
William D. Herrin ................ herrin at dirtside.com  bill at herrin.us
3005 Crane Dr. ...................... Web: <http://bill.herrin.us/>
Falls Church, VA 22042-3004