[arin-ppml] ARIN-prop-157 Section 8.3 Simplification

[Benson Schliesser]

On Sep 21, 2011, at 10:08 PM, Tom Vest wrote:

> Believe it.

I do, because here I am doing it again.

> You are erroneously presuming that protocol number resources as a class already possess the status that this proposal would impose on them, i.e.,  that of chattel property. But they don't,

I do think that a market mechanism will allow operators to get number resources, in an environment where addresses are scarce and the RIRs can't help.  I have yet to see anyone suggest a realistic alternative.  As for "status" as "chattel", those are your words not mine.

Contrary to the common prejudice, not all advocates of an address market are laissez faire free-market advocates.  I happen to believe strongly in the value of pragmatic regulation.  Of course, regulation only works when it is carried out by an agency authorized to do so (and with the power to enforce).

In any case, I'd welcome a conversation on the topic of addresses as property. But this wasn't actually the topic of my previous message.

> and your attempts to shoehorn the policy discussion into the narrow terms of your own ideology will indeed be in vain.

I appreciate your attempt to leverage my own terminology, but it illustrates that you've missed the point.

There are those on PPML that apparently think ARIN's primary role is policy.  But some of us rather think that ARIN's primary role is registration. (You know, the second "R" in RIR.)  Aligned with this latter perspective is a respect for the de facto "sovereignty" of operators that ARIN supports.  My contention is that ARIN has no right to legislate and no power to regulate.

Which brings me back to the original issue:  If we wish ARIN to prohibit something, the burden is on us to demonstrate why and how.  I see no basis for prohibiting ASN transfers, unless somebody can explain why it causes harm.  I'm personally skeptical of the value in transferring ASNs, but that's no reason to object.

Cheers,
-Benson


> On Sep 21, 2011, at 9:31 PM, Benson Schliesser wrote:
> 
>> This is incredibly backwards thinking. If somebody in the community wishes to do something and you wish to prohibit it, the burden of justification is yours. 
>> 
>> ARIN is here to serve, not vainly attempt to enforce ideology (or whim). I'd prefer that we just do our job, maintain an accurate registry, and record transfers when they happen. 
>> 
>> I can't believe I'm even bothering to respond to this...
>> -Benson
>> 
>> 
>> On Sep 21, 2011, at 18:59, Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> I would turn this around… I don't believe anyone has presented
>>> a strong argument for allowing ASN transfers and I do not believe
>>> that the community would benefit from such an action.