[arin-ppml] Fwd: ARIN-prop-165 Eliminate Needs-Based Justification

[Matthew Petach]

On Tue, Feb 28, 2012 at 11:48 AM, Jo Rhett <jrhett at netconsonance.com> wrote:
> On Feb 28, 2012, at 10:53 AM, Matthew Petach wrote:
>
> It seems that participation in the global
> routing table is not a requirement condition for
> being an operator, and that indeed there is no
> externally visible condition or attribute that can
> be seen to indicate whether an entity is an
> operator or not.
>
>
> Whether or not someone is an operator is not a useful distinction. The
> current policy asks for whether or not they need the space, which is the
> useful attribute but you seem to be fighting against for reasons nobody can
> quite understand.

I apologize.  I was simply going to leave it
as

"+1 in favor of proposition 165"

but I was asked to explain why I
supported proposal 165.  If you cannot
understand my reasons, that's unfortunate,
but that doesn't invalidate my vote, and as
such, rather than take up more space on
the list, I suppose it might make people
happier if I simply leave it as

"please record for the official PPML tally on this
proposal one more vote in favour of it"

rather than trying to explain my thinking.

> And if so, do we trust that judgment sufficiently to have it be the sole
> arbiter of the market?
>
> Um, no. The current policy is to focus on the need for space, which is in
> fact what ARIN is directed to deal with.

I guess I should simply be happy that the term "need" is
sufficiently vague to allow anyone to apply for IP space
based on their stated "need" for it, whether or not that
"need" translates into real-world usage, as it seems
it can be sufficient to "need" it for an internal network
not visible to the rest of the internet.

> If we do, then I'd think about removing my support
> for proposal 165, and instead support a proposal
> for an open, unfettered market for exchange of IPv4
> address resources *between operators*, with the
> results of transfers to be registered by ARIN.
>
> You have consistently shouted out against people having gotten big
> allocations in the early Internet, and now you are suggesting you'd advocate
> for a policy that would allow all of these "privileged classes" (your words)
> to trade between each other without ARIN oversight?
>
> I am beginning to believe that I fell for a troll.  Sorry, everyone.

I've been careful to avoid using capitalization or other
typography that would indicate shouting.  I apologize
if anything I've said came across as shouting in any
way.  This was merely meant to point out my thoughts
on the matter.

As it is not a requirement of ARIN membership to have
to explain one's thought processes to an uninterested
audience, I'll cease to waste your time, and will simply
vote in the way that makes the most sense for me.  I
encourage others to do likewise.

Thanks!

Matt