[arin-ppml] Against 2013-4

[Jimmy Hess]

On 6/4/13, Kevin Kargel <kkargel at polartel.com> wrote:
> I for one am a supporter of the needs basis.  As I have said before, if we

I don't.   I favor needs basis policy as a necessary evil;  to avoid
excess abuse of the registry, and help assure the conservation of
scarce number resources.

Needs basis is a bad thing,  in the sense that it essentially says
"The RIR is going to decide what the RIR thinks you need, and give you
only this" -- but for IPv4 and ASN numbers, this is good policy.

> eliminate the needs basis then I want to be first in line to request
> everything that is left.  I am sure there will be quite a queue.

I am in favor of needs basis being deprecated for  IPv6, and newer
more appropriately sized number resource pools,   and replaced with
something else that will provide conservation.

For example:   Pay for quantity of resources.    Or:   demonstration
of meaningful plan to utilize resources.

When we are talking about resources you might need in  5 years;  this
is not about "needs basis",  but  about  reasonable future
projections.

I believe for IPv6,  "needs basis" is obsolete, and   "Reasonable
future projected use"  should be the standard.

> My perception is that the ARIN community is strongly biased to support needs

The ARIN community is strongly biased towards supporting IPv4,  so it
makes sense,  they would  favor  draconian policy  required to support
a rapidly diminishing resource.
But this isn't good for ARIN.

> basis and there is a very vocal minority trying to eliminate it so that they
> can create a market they can profit by.  I don't read the opposition to

Characterizing  opponents as  "vocal minority  with an agenda"
in that manner is so disingenuous...


> needs basis as having anything to do with the good of the community, though
> there have been many mutations of the spin on it to try and advertise it
> that way.
>
> Kevin
--
-JH