[arin-ppml] Against 2013-4

[Scott Leibrand]

On Jun 5, 2013, at 7:51 PM, John Curran <jcurran at arin.net> wrote:

> On Jun 5, 2013, at 6:59 PM, Jimmy Hess <mysidia at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> The word "need"  gets mixed up with these other things, that are
>> artificial constructions and don't have to do with need  --   as I
>> understand,  the transfer policies are interpreted in a capricious and
>> biased way --  in other words,  ARIN staff imagine  that there are
>> extra restrictions or constraints that are allowed to be imposed,
>> besides demonstration of need.
>> 
>> For example:  that a transfer recipient requesting a /24    has had to
>> have justified a /20 first.
> 
> Jimmy - 
> 
> I'll have to disagree with your characterization "capricious and
> bias" interpretation of policy, but will concur that the NRPM 8.3
> transfer policy, by its nature of requiring qualification under 
> "under current ARIN policies" (only with a longer time window),
> can be difficult to administer under some circumstances.  
> 
> The example you cite (having to meet the ISP minimum allocation
> size) is indeed one such result, and there are others.  ARIN staff
> work to bring issues such as these to the community through the 
> Policy Experience report given at each Public Policy Meeting,
> as well as on this mailing list, so that the community can 
> consider whether a change to policy is warranted as a result.
> (e.g. the implications of the current policy language and 
> resulting minimum was discussed on this list on 16 April 2013,
> and it is possible for anyone in the community to submit a 
> policy proposal to change it if they feel it is an issue.)

And I (and likely a number of other AC members) would be happy to help if you are interested. 

-Scott