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

[Jimmy Hess]

On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 12:56 PM, Robert Seastrom <ppml at rs.seastrom.com> wrote:
>later).  The salient changes are as follows:
> * Demonstrated need is solely the determination of the recipient's RIR (subject to them having a needs-based policy in place) rather than having to qualify with both the recipient RIR and with ARIN.
> * Delete "within 3 months" immediate need clause.

Exactly.    I oppose the policy as written, and those particular
changes make it worse.

I see  from the draft that it is proposed ARIN throw caution to the
wind and automatically accept whatever the recipient's RIR rules are
as long as ARIN staff interpret the receiving RIR as having a
"compatible needs based policy that the other RIR will use to evaluate
the need of the recipient".

There's really no community benefit of even listing the restriction
when it gets that weak,  as  ARIN's own justified need policy is the
most restrictive.    Some RIRs have less restrictive policies  to
evaluate the recipient,  therefore, the result is _all_  RIRs
actually have  policies for evaluating the recipient that are
compatible with ARIN transferring addresses.

Why bother with the restriction, on the off chance another RIR will
come up with a stricter criteria for receiving addresses, resulting in
incompatibility with ARIN's  justified need policy?

That is... there's not really RIRs that would have a policy resulting
in them rejecting a transfer that ARIN would approve in their own
region,  and if there are,   just let the receiving RIR enforce their
own policy rather than encumbering the Inter-RIR transfer rule  with
some ambiguous notion  of "compatibility".

>to draft policy (pp-xxx to 20xx-xx promotion) it had better be "NRPM-ized".  A proposal that does not >countenance specific and well-defined changes to the NRPM is simply a wish, it is not a fully developed >policy proposal.

Exactly.
It should be in the form of  a policy proposal at the time discussed.

It is all good and well with the AC drafting policy proposals, but
THIS should not be at last call.

THIS specific proposal should be further discussed.



--
-JH