[arin-ppml] An article of interest to the community....

[Mike Burns]

>When STLS was being developed, the AC was very careful to specify that
>merely listing resources for sale on STLS or through another medium was
>not in itself to subject a resource holder to a section 12 review or any
>procedure for revocation. Neither, however, was such listing intended to
>provide a safe harbor against ARIN proceeding with any such action
>based on other independent data or investigation.

>In other words, while we don't want listing your addresses to flag you for
>an audit, we also don't want to create a situation where merely listing
>addresses gives you an exemption from policy.

>Owen


Hi Owen,

In the real world, the real corporate world at least, the idea of every 
workstation having a real public IP address went away more than a decade ago 
for the most part.
Same thing in the residential world.
In fact, my guess is that you would only see such profligate use of IP 
addresses in public or academic environments.

It's only a guess based on my experience, perhaps some more feedback is 
needed?

As far as the idea of people returning address space to ARIN for community 
purposes, how's that working out for ARIN?

You have merely restated the problem I elucidated with John.

You want to maintain the belief system that addresses are to be returned for 
disuse per the RSA, and that enforcement of that is incorporated as a 
section 12 review/revokation.

Yet 8.3 allows holders to sell addresses.

The conundrum of course is that in order to comply with policy, the seller 
has to pretend to be using the addresses efficiently so as to preclude the 
threat of section 12.

If the seller chooses to thus pretend in order to advertise his available 
space, his lawyer, reading the RSA, is likely to advise him that he runs the 
risk of losing that space to a section 12 review.
His shareholders, then, (even if it is one person holding the shares), will 
advise not to advertise the addresses, instead to hold on and wait for 
policy change, or else to process a transaction in the dark so as not to 
engender the section 12 review.

Neither of these last options is desirable if we truly are seeking to bring 
unused addresses into use and comply with the goals of conservation and 
registrations.

Regards,
Mike