[arin-ppml] ARIN-prop-174 Policies Apply to All Resources in the Registry

[Milton L Mueller]

John,

> 
> Milton - If we're going to keep the discussion on what makes for good
> policy in the various proposals, it would be helpful if you would also
> refrain from "verbal assertion of authority over an issue that is
> legally and politically contested."  i.e. In this particular case, it is
> clear that ARIN _can_ require any party to conform to community policy
> before changing the number resource registration in the registry.  How
> that conflates with your statement above is still contested, so it would
> be best to instead argue for the inclusion or omission of need-basis for
> transfers based on its own policy merits or concerns (if we are indeed
> to follow your advice.)
> 

I guess you didn't read the rest of my message:

[from a policy perspective, should ARIN] use the leverage afforded by the registry update to make the legacy holder behave the way ARIN wants it to behave?

I view that as creating risk without achieving much value. Legacy holders and buyers intent upon transferring resources without needs assessments will find a way to do so anyway. But refusing to update the listing causes a number of problems that affect anyone. 

Moreover, I fail to see what ARIN really loses by simply allowing those legacy holders to do what they want and updating its records regardless.  Most transfers will still occur under 8.3. Note also that several actors in the trading space have voluntarily signed LRSAs as part of a legacy transfer, when ARIN appealed to them to do so. It is likely that many others would follow suit.