[arin-ppml] 2011-1 dissent Was: Re: ARIN-2011-1: ARINInter-RIRTransfers - Last Call

[Sweeting, John]

Hi Kevin,

Not sure if this helps but it must fit the word "compatible" according to
ARIN, that is one of the reasons for the wording "only via RIR's who agree
to the transfer" to be included.



On 10/25/11 11:33 PM, "Kevin Blumberg" <kevinb at thewire.ca> wrote:

>Own,
>
>This is my major issue with the rewrite. The reality is that the current
>text
>in last call doesn't deal with another region relaxing their policies to
>still
>fit within the word "compatible".
>
>A policy needs to be able to be forward looking. The rewrite of 2011-1
>would
>now allow another RIR to modify the intent of our policy by solely
>relaxing their own polices.
>
>While I believe the ARIN AC has done a lot towards cleaning up the text,
>the shift of
>responsibility to outside our region is deeply concerning.
>
>Example Policy Proposal from Region XYZ post adoption:
>
>"Parties requesting Inter-RIR transfers may do so with 48 month
>justification criteria
>based on 50 percent current utilization".
>
>
>Kevin Blumberg
>T 416.214.9473 x31
>F 416.862.9473
>kevinb at thewire.ca
>
>
>
>
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net [mailto:arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net] On
>> Behalf Of Owen DeLong
>> Sent: Tuesday, October 25, 2011 8:34 PM
>> To: William Herrin
>> Cc: John Curran; arin-ppml at arin.net List
>> Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] 2011-1 dissent Was: Re: ARIN-2011-1: ARINInter-
>> RIRTransfers - Last Call
>>
>>
>> On Oct 25, 2011, at 5:25 PM, William Herrin wrote:
>>
>> > On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 8:16 PM, Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com>
>> wrote:
>> >> On Oct 25, 2011, at 3:35 PM, William Herrin wrote:
>> >>> I can't bend on the idea that we'll let other regions set their own,
>> >>> LESS-stringent-than-ARIN rules for consuming ARIN addresses while we
>> >>> continue to apply more restrictive rules to identical registrants
>> >>> here at home. That is beyond careless stewardship. If I may borrow
>> >>> your turn of phrase, it violates a fundamental expectation of any
>> >>> fair and equitable industry self-regulation.
>> >>
>> >> Can you back up this claim with any form of evidence or fact?
>> >
>> > "Under the proposed policy text, it does not matter if the other RIRs
>> > requirements are more or less strict than ARIN's" -- John Curran,
>> > 10/20/2011 explaining ARIN's interpretation of the 2011-1 text.
>> >
>>
>> That is not the same as claiming that other RIRs have a less
>>restrictive policy.
>> Can you back that claim up specifically. I do not believe it currently
>>holds true.
>>
>> Owen
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> PPML
>> 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:
>> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
>> Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.
>_______________________________________________
>PPML
>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:
>http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
>Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.


This E-mail and any of its attachments may contain Time Warner Cable proprietary information, which is privileged, confidential, or subject to copyright belonging to Time Warner Cable. This E-mail is intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient of this E-mail, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, copying, or action taken in relation to the contents of and attachments to this E-mail is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this E-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately and permanently delete the original and any copy of this E-mail and any printout.