[arin-ppml] ARIN-prop-176 Increase Needs-Based Justification to 60 months on 8.3 Specified Transfers

[Tom Vest]

Hi Jeff, 

Out of curiosity, could you suggest ( at min.) one set of data that would be sufficient, in your view, to determine the appropriateness of a(ny) IP number resource transfer market, under current or any other imaginable policy criteria? How would you define "appropriateness" and what sort of data would you need to make such a judgment? 

If this question seems too abstract, perhaps you could point us to some other, well-established market that demonstrably satisfies its own "appropriateness" criteria based on "objective" data that is, if not publicly available, at least available to some disinterested "appropriateness evaluators"? 

Thanks, 

Tom Vest

On Jun 28, 2012, at 6:25 AM, <jeffmehlenbacher at ipv4marketgroup.com> <jeffmehlenbacher at ipv4marketgroup.com> wrote:

> <snip> I have a real concern that the body of data available for assessment is neither comprehensive
> nor focused on dictating success or failure of the current 24 month
> justification period.  I would be interested in understanding what data
> will be monitored to determine the appropriateness of current policy for
> 8.3s.
> 
> Thanks!
> 
> Jeff Mehlenbacher
> 
> 
> Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2012 08:11:24 +0000
> From: "Alexander, Daniel" <Daniel_Alexander at Cable.Comcast.com>
> To: "arin-ppml at arin.net" <arin-ppml at arin.net>
> Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] ARIN-prop-176 Increase Needs-Based
> Justification to 60 months on 8.3 Specified Transfers
> Message-ID:
> <B64177493F39BA4A81233AA84B50049E5A2BA30E at PACDCEXMB12.cable.comcast.com>
> 
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252"
> 
> Jeff,
> 
> One of the primary justifications used during the debate of 8.3
> transfers
> claimed that transfers would put underutilized resources to use. By
> stretching the period to five years, we start trading one underutilized
> resource holder for another. This is a contradiction to the claimed
> benefits that everyone was supposed to accept who objected to these
> transactions.
> 
> No sooner than section 8.3 was created the policies came in to expand
> the
> timeframes. The timeframes have already been expanded before having any
> data as to the benefits or consequences of the changes that have been
> made. While I don't claim to know what the magic number should be, I
> think
> this change would be irresponsible at this time, based only on the
> speculations made on this mailing list.
> 
> I'm opposed to this proposal.
> 
> Dan Alexander
> Speaking as myself
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> PPML
> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
> the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML at arin.net).
> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
> Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.