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

Kevin Kargel kkargel at polartel.com
Mon Feb 27 16:34:56 EST 2012


 
________________________________________
>From: arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net [mailto:arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net] On
>Behalf Of Jo Rhett
>Sent: Monday, February 27, 2012 3:17 PM
>To: ARIN PPML
>Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] ARIN-prop-165 Eliminate Needs-Based Justification

>On Feb 27, 2012, at 1:10 PM, Astrodog wrote:
>I agree that needs-based justification makes sense for "new"
>allocations from ARIN.
>Inter-registrant transfers, on the other hand, make less sense to me.
>
.
>I think it is important to examine the two sets of
>circumstances separately.

>Just for those who might be counting, I disagree entirely. I see an
>allocation as an allocation, no matter the source. I think that all
>recipients of allocations should have the exact same policy applied to
>them.

[kjk] +1 --  I will agree with Jo.  I will even go further and say that a
registration is a registration and that all registrants should be subject to
the same policy.  The only place this fails is with the “legacy” holders who
do not fall under the common umbrella but for whom registrations are
maintained per prior agreement and for the good of the community. 

Now - if a "legacy" holder returns or relinquishes or transfers space and a
new registration or allocation or transfer needs to be effected then I do
strongly feel that the "new" allocation should fall under the common rules,
restrictions and aegis provided by the community via ARIN RSA (*not* LRSA).


>-- 
>Jo Rhett
>Net Consonance : consonant endings by net philanthropy, open source and
>other randomness
>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature
Size: 4935 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20120227/2169df22/attachment-0001.bin>


More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list