[arin-ppml] Against 2013-4
scottleibrand at gmail.com
Wed Jun 5 21:44:47 EDT 2013
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.
More information about the ARIN-PPML