[arin-ppml] 2011-1 dissent Was: Re: ARIN-2011-1: ARIN Inter-RIR Transfers - Last Call
farmer at umn.edu
Fri Oct 21 08:42:03 EDT 2011
On 10/21/11 03:50 CDT, William Herrin wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 10:29 PM, Owen DeLong<owen at delong.com> wrote:
>> I believe that a substantially less restrictive policy would be incompatible.
> Unfortunately, John Curran has just posted that's not the case. Under
> the current text, another RIR's policy whose basis for needs
> justification is substantially less restrictive than ARIN's would
> still control for addresses transferred out of the region. 2011-1, as
> presently written, may cause substantially more restrictive
> justification policies to be applied to ARIN transferees receiving
> ARIN addresses than to out-region transferees receiving ARIN
> I find that fundamentally unfair and have a big problem with it.
First, I'm not unsympathetic to the fairness argument, and on the
surface applying both RIR's transfer policies seems like a fair way to
solve this problem. However, once you scratch the surface and start
looking at how such a policy will work from a practical point of view
things get ugly very fast and it no longer looks as fair as it did on
ARIN will not have any independent history to base its analysis of need
on and will be dependent on the records of the other RIR anyway. The
organization from the other RIR's region will not necessarily be
familiar with ARIN's policy and processes. It doubles the work for the
organizations involved in the transfer. There will frequently be
language and cultural issues that get in the way of a fair and complete
analysis, there are a more practical issues like business hours, etc...
that will interfere with easy flow of information. These are the exact
reasons that the RIR system was crated in the first place. Forcing both
policies to be applied ignores more than a decade of experience in good
Internet number resource management. How is that fair?
Beyond that, we really need to be careful when we start throwing around
the word "FAIR", it cuts both ways. With the legacy resources in our
region we have approximately half of all IPv4 resources. On the
surface, there are NOT many ways that seems fair, its not fair by
population, its not even fair by land mass. But if you dig down there
are valid reasons why.
So, on the surface it may seem fair to apply both policies, but we have
to dig deeper, and when you do, applying both policies really isn't
practical, probably will not really result in more fairness in the
system as a whole, and it is possible that it would be less fair.
By the way, thank you for holding our feet to the fire, by actually
asking questions, it is far more important to the system than actually
writing the text, not that that's easy either.
David Farmer Email:farmer at umn.edu
Networking & Telecommunication Services
Office of Information Technology
University of Minnesota
2218 University Ave SE Phone: 612-626-0815
Minneapolis, MN 55414-3029 Cell: 612-812-9952
More information about the ARIN-PPML