[arin-ppml] 2011-1: reciprocity NOT required
bill at herrin.us
Wed Oct 26 11:54:09 EDT 2011
On Wed, Oct 26, 2011 at 11:36 AM, Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com> wrote:
> Unfair characterization based on the incorrect assumption contained
> above. Perhaps you would do well to go through the APNIC policy
> documents and have a quick read prior to posting broad assumptions
> about what their policies say or do. I am not sure whether APNICs
> current policy would implement reciprocity or not. I will, however,
> ask APNIC staff for guidance on this aspect. I'm inclined to believe
> that it would, actually, but, rather than speculate, I'll post again when
> I have an authoritative answer.
Whether they elect to implement reciprocity or not is largely
immaterial. 2011-1 does not require them to as a condition of buying
addresses from ARIN registrants. Nor does it require RIPE or LACNIC to
to newly implement reciprocity as a condition of buying addresses from
And the characterization is not unfair. It's what you get from a rush job.
> This is a relatively lightweight modification to
> the existing proposal to bring it in line with the NRPM
Now who's making an unfair characterization?
> At this point, yes, I believe
> it needs more modification and another last call. I do not believe it
> needs to go all the way back to step 2.
> In reality, the current policy will result in the CEO making such
> determinations and I am quite sure that he will have board guidance
> in the process (whether he wants it or not).
Thankfully we don't have to guess. We've been told how the policy will
be interpreted: as permitting much of the potential bad behavior I've
described, including the lack of reciprocity.
William D. Herrin ................ herrin at dirtside.com bill at herrin.us
3005 Crane Dr. ...................... Web: <http://bill.herrin.us/>
Falls Church, VA 22042-3004
More information about the ARIN-PPML