[arin-ppml] Transfers by non-legacy address holders and perceived risk of reclamation

[John Curran]

On Sep 1, 2011, at 1:38 PM, William Herrin wrote:

> On Thu, Sep 1, 2011 at 9:44 AM, John Curran <jcurran at arin.net> wrote:
>> Possibly.  Another option would be to explicitly change NRPM 12
>> (or the RSA) to preclude reclamation for utilization in general,
>> if one accepts that the combination of overall demand for number
>> resources plus a functional market will result in underutilized
>> resources being put to better use.
> 
> John,
> 
> If we want ARIN to enforce efficient utilization then that includes
> audits and revocation.

Bill - 
 
  At no time in the history of the Internet number registry system has 
  there been an aggressive attempt to account for utilization of all of 
  the addresses that have been issued.  This includes the practices of 
  the RIRs today all they way back to Jon Postel in the beginning.  We
  do have a great deal of anecdotal experience with parties returning 
  address space or exchanging it for a more appropriate allocation,
  and we do encourage efficient utilization via audits when requesting
  additional resources, but your statement implies a duty of ARIN that
  goes beyond encouragement.  

  You've asserted a binary end-state where ARIN is either "to enforce
  efficient utilization" or is to disregard utilization it altogether, 
  and this does not reflect reality of any point in history of the
  Internet number registry system.

FYI,
/John

John Curran
President and CEO
ARIN