[arin-ppml] ARIN-prop-178 Regional Use of Resources

[Tony Hain]

Owen DeLong wrote:
> 
> That would basically completely enable policy shopping and/or fee shopping
> to select whichever of the 5 RIRs you wanted regardless of location.
> 
> I cannot support that.

Since when is competition a bad thing? As long as someone is a member, they
are entitled to the resources just like every other member. As long as they
are not doing duplicate requests for the same deployment, and they are
meeting policy, what does it matter where the deployment happens?   Any
smart member of all 5 registries would realize which policies they do or do
not meet, and would only make one request any way. 

Bottom line; you can't say regional use restrictions are an operational
requirement without redeploying all past discrepancies. This means any
attempt at regional use restrictions going forward is simply based on
hoarding the remaining pool. 

Tony


> 
> Owen
> 
> On Jul 15, 2012, at 10:32 AM, David Farmer wrote:
> 
> >
> >
> > On 7/14/12 17:32 CDT, Tony Hain wrote:
> >> Owen DeLong wrote:
> >>> On Jul 14, 2012, at 10:07 AM, Tony Hain wrote:
> > ...
> >>>
> >>> This proposal applies to ASNs and IPv6 resources as well as IPv4.
> >>
> >> As it should, but there is still no justification for language that
> >> attempts to restrict where a resource is used. It is the height of
> >> hypocrisy to tell ARIN members that they cannot claim property rights
> >> over the assigned resources, yet ARIN has the ability to assert
> >> property rights by restricting where an asset gets used. The steward
> >> role requires ARIN to watch for duplicate requests to other RIRs for
> >> the same need, but the facilitator role requires them to -- actually
> >> distribute -- the resources. When the only intent of proposed
> >> language is to prevent distribution of resource because someone
> >> outside the ARIN region might benefit, it has to be called out and
> >> removed as counter to ARINs role as facilitator on behalf of IANA for
the
> global resource.
> >>
> >> As long as a member makes a justified request, and is not duplicating
> >> that to get more from other RIRs, where that resource gets deployed
> >> is their issue alone. Besides, no matter what policy is put in place
> >> it is unenforceable because any resource that gets allocated can be
> >> moved later with a 'change of business requirements', and what
> >> justifies attempting reclamation? Unless you plan to make every
> >> operating network renumber all AS & address resources to be compliant
> >> with a regional restriction, there is no 'need' to do so for new
> >> deployments; meaning any such policy would not withstand a challenge.
> >> The only plausible justification for attempting a protectionist
> >> region restriction is hoarding to retain what little pool is left, in a
> hypocritical contortion of property rights.
> >>
> >> RIPE will exhaust their remaining IPv4 pool in a couple of  months,
> >> so the pressure to do something will increase. Unfortunately people
> >> will more often do the irrational thing under pressure, and this
> >> protectionist language is already starting down that road. Raising
> >> the threat of 'shell companies subverting RIR control' only furthers
the
> irrational behavior.
> >
> > OK, I slept on it and have an idea.
> >
> > I need to reiterate the four requirements I discussed in my last
> > email;
> >
> > 1. Regional independence and control of policy
> >
> > 2. Only justify the use of resources to the RIR you received them from
> > using that RIRs policies
> >
> > 3. Prevent duplicate and/or overlapping requests to multiple RIRs, in
> > other words provide stewardship
> >
> > 4. No restriction on location of use
> >
> > So, I'll float an idea.  What if we allowed the requester to select
between
> #2 or #4, allowing #1 and #3 to be meet in all cases.  This way
regionalization
> is simply a tool for simplifying justification of need and not necessarily
a
> requirement to receive resources in all cases.
> >
> > This could be done with the following small rewrite of the first
paragraph.
> >
> > ----
> >
> > X. Regionalized Use of Resources
> >
> > Requests for number resources must meet the following criteria regarding
> regionalized use of resources for ARIN to only evaluate a request based on
> an organizations ARIN registered resources and according to ARIN policies,
> including any resource specific criteria. Otherwise, ARIN must evaluate a
> request based on an organizations total globally registered resources and
> only according to ARIN policies, including any resource specific criteria.
> >
> > ----
> >
> > Is this workable?  What do you think Tony?  What does the rest of the
> community think?  Would there need to be additional criteria defining how
> ARIN evaluates a organizations globally registered resource?
> >
> > Like I said I'm just floating an idea, I'm not even sure I like it yet.
> >
> > Let me know what you think.
> >
> > --
> > ===============================================
> > 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
> > ===============================================
> >