[arin-ppml] Draft Policy ARIN-2011-1: ARIN Inter-RIR Transfers - revised
farmer at umn.edu
Fri Sep 23 18:01:48 EDT 2011
On 9/23/11 10:47 CDT, Kevin Kargel wrote:
>> To conclude the ARIN region has as much or more address space than the
>> rest of the world combined. Part of that is natural, the Internet
>> started in what is now the ARIN region, but it seems wrong to say what
>> is in our region stays in our region when our region has been given so
>> much. If you also include that most of the growth of the Internet is
>> and will continue to be outside our region then it is doubly wrong, and
>> just adds insult to injury.
>> See: http://www.nro.net/wp-content/uploads/nro_stats_2011_q2.pdf
> I will agree with you to a point and enthusiastically support your altruism. To that end ARIN should identify how much surplus space it has and return that surplus block to IANA for redistribution to the poorer players. This would be the simplest solution to the conundrum.
To me it is not altruism, it is motivated self interest. Most of the
growth of the Internet is occurring outside the ARIN region. I happen
to believe that enabling growth across the whole Internet provides more
value to the ARIN region, my organization, and me as an individual, than
enabling growth only within the ARIN region. Or put it another way
enabling growth within the ARIN region while causing or allowing
stagnation of growth in other regions does not serve the real needs of
the ARIN region or the Internet.
> If, however, one maintains that the best route is to hold the space for maximum profit in directed transfers then I will posit that the motivation is not altruism but greed.
As I see it we had three basic choices;
1. Ask people to return addresses for reuse
2. Force people to return addresses for reuse
3. Create a system that allows economic incentives for reuse of addresses
While there are notable exceptions, #1 hasn't been all that successful
overall. #2 will necessarily cause an adversarial relationship between
ARIN and resource holders and will likely lead to litigation. That
leaves us with some form of #3, while controversial I believe we have a
consensus for what we are calling "needs based specified transfers."
Organizations that can justify their need can negotiate with other
organizations that have or can create a surplus of addresses.
You seem to be fundamentally opposed to transfers and are more arguing
against any expansion of transfers, than you seem to be arguing against
sharing addresses with the rest of the world.
I have come to believe the only way we will see any significant reuse is
through transfers, and I don't not think it is in the overall interest
of the ARIN community to limit these transfers to only the ARIN region.
Now that APNIC is restoring a needs basis to there transfers and given
that they are more or less out of addresses. I can not see any
justifiable reason to prevent them from arranging transfers from
organizations within the ARIN region where the vast majority of the
legacy address space is located.
The controversy surrounding transfers has lead to increasing animosity
within the community both regionally and globally. I believe we need
pragmatic compromise to allow us to come to a consensus to move things
forward. I'm starting to see a consensus develop, APNIC is moving their
prop-96 forward, to restore a needs basis. Now, it is up to the ARIN
community needs to find a way to allow inter-region transfers.
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