[arin-ppml] 2011-1: reciprocity NOT required

William Herrin 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
ARIN registrants.

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.

Hard headed.

> 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.

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

More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list