[arin-ppml] 2014-1 Out of Region Use

[Bill Darte]

Steven Ryerse said:
In my opinion this community is so caught up in making sure needs based
policies are followed, that it has lost sight of the real mission of
advancing the Internet.  Regardless of your personal definition of need,
why is some org who doesn't have a need (as currently defined by policy)
now precluded from getting resources?  How does that advance the Internet?

The community through ARIN is ensuring that the distribution of v4 IP
addresses are according to its policies which have been and should continue
to be needs-based..IMO.  They are not 'caught up' in the sense that they
cannot proceed...ndeed, they are doing the precise business that policy and
its mission calls for.  That some orgs that cannot meet the needs hurdle
are denied...does not mean that others who truly have a need are not
serviced.  Those with clear need advance the Internet and do so
demonstrably...whereas those without a demonstrable need MAY advance the
Internet as well, but its a greater risk to the community and one which the
community has chosen to forgo.

Bill Darte

On Mon, Dec 15, 2014 at 12:17 AM, Steven Ryerse <
SRyerse at eclipse-networks.com> wrote:
>
> Though it has been a few months since I made those comments, I appreciate
> your feedback.  Your description of "walk away with someone else’s
> belongings" seems to indicate that somehow the use of the Internet and the
> IP addresses that make the use of the Internet possible, is owned by ARIN
> or this Community or maybe ARIN and this Community.
>
> I find that line of thinking about as far as one can get from the spirit
> of Jon Postel and the way he went about advancing the Internet.  When I
> read the original Mission Statement for ARIN or even the current one, I
> don't see that "needs" are more important than the actual mission of
> advancement and allocation.  Good stewardship should be practiced but NOT
> to the detriment of the mission of advancement and allocation.
>
> In my opinion this community is so caught up in making sure needs based
> policies are followed, that it has lost sight of the real mission of
> advancing the Internet.  Regardless of your personal definition of need,
> why is some org who doesn't have a need (as currently defined by policy)
> now precluded from getting resources?  How does that advance the Internet?
> I never met Jon Postel but from what I've heard about him, I suspect he
> would frown on some of the current policies regarding needs.  My comments
> below and others I have made are intended to try to bring some balance into
> the discussion and my hope is that some day in the near future that will
> happen.  I certainly don't desire there be no rules at all but the very
> loose rules followed by Jon Postel worked pretty well advancing the
> Internet.  I think we could loosen the current policies like has been done
> in other regions and it would have a positive outcome.  My two cents.
>
> Steven Ryerse
> President
> 100 Ashford Center North, Suite 110, Atlanta, GA  30338
> www.eclipse-networks.com
> 770.656.1460 - Cell
> 770.399.9099- Office
>
> ℠ Eclipse Networks, Inc.
>                      Conquering Complex Networks℠
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jo Rhett [mailto:jrhett at netconsonance.com]
> Sent: Monday, December 15, 2014 12:17 AM
> To: Steven Ryerse
> Cc: arin-ppml at arin.net
> Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] 2014-1 Out of Region Use
>
> On Oct 27, 2014, at 5:23 PM, Steven Ryerse <SRyerse at eclipse-networks.com>
> wrote:
> > If in the spirit of trying to prevent fraud non-fraudulent requests get
> rejected, then Arin's mission stops being fulfilled.  I think it is
> important to make sure the mission is respected first and stopping fraud
> second or third or fifth or whatever.  We could stop all fraud by stopping
> all allocations but of course that makes no sense.  I would also point out
> that even when fraud happens Arin's Mission is still being fulfilled.
>
> I completely disagree. There are dozens if not hundreds of people with
> non-fraudulent requests who get denied for insufficient justification. That
> is ARIN doing their job successfully in my mind. If widespread fraud occurs
> and ARIN does not take action, then I feel strongly that ARIN would not be
> doing their job.
>
> > Of course maybe if the needs tests were loosened fraud would be
> significantly reduced as there would be no need to submit fraudulent
> requests.
>
> Do you mean that if it were permissible to walk away with someone else’s
> belongings, then theft would no longer occur? Your statement is true
> without making any sense at all.
>
> > I'm sure an org willing to submit a fraudulent request would tell you
> that they do have a need but they may not happen to meet the current
> arbitrary (and they are arbitrary) policy.
>
> I disagree completely. ARIN’s role is to satisfy needs-based requests.
> Exercising judgement of whether a need is realistic is doing their job.
>
> The only thing arbitrary here is your desire for there to be no rules at
> all. Deeply amusing, but not helpful for realistic policy.
>
> --
> Jo Rhett
> +1 (415) 999-1798
> Skype: jorhett
> Net Consonance : net philanthropy to improve open source and internet
> projects.
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20141215/1d25bb5e/attachment.htm>