[arin-ppml] Recommended Draft Policy ARIN-2014-1: Out of Region Use

[Andrew Dul]

Marty,

Can you be a little more specific.  Are you opposed to the whole concept
or the draft as written? 

Do you support the ARIN's current operational practice of excluding
address space, which is in use outside the region, from being considered
utilized when applying for additional allocations?

This was one of the things this policy was attempting to rectify.

I know you support removing all needs requirements, but that isn't the
current policy in this region. 

Andrew

On 12/24/2014 9:03 AM, Martin Hannigan wrote:
> If Ebola were a draft policy it would be this one. Not in favor. 
>
>
>
>> On Dec 24, 2014, at 11:50, William Herrin <bill at herrin.us> wrote:
>>
>>> On Wed, Dec 24, 2014 at 11:21 AM, ARIN <info at arin.net> wrote:
>>> Policy statement:
>>>
>>> Create new Section X:
>>>
>>> ARIN registered resources may be used outside the ARIN service region. Out
>>> of region use of IPv4, IPv6, or ASNs are valid justification for additional
>>> number resources if the applicant is currently using at least the equivalent
>>> of a /22 of IPv4, /44 of IPv6, or 1 ASN within the ARIN service region,
>>> respectively.
>>>
>>> The services and facilities used to justify the need for ARIN resources that
>>> will be used out of region cannot also be used to justify resource requests
>>> from another RIR. When a request for resources from ARIN is justified by
>>> need located within another RIR’s service region, the officer of the
>>> applicant must attest that the same services and facilities have not been
>>> used as the basis for a resource request in the other region(s). ARIN
>>> reserves the right to request a listing of all the applicant's number
>>> holdings in the region(s) of proposed use, but this should happen only when
>>> there are significant reasons to suspect duplicate requests.
>> I think this is bad policy which will encourage registry shopping by
>> large multinational companies who really don't need yet another
>> advantage over their smaller competitors. Worse than just making ARIN
>> a flag-of-convenience registry to the world, it includes just enough
>> in-region requirement to shut out small players. I reiterate my
>> OPPOSITION to this draft policy.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Bill Herrin
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> -- 
>> William Herrin ................ herrin at dirtside.com  bill at herrin.us
>> Owner, Dirtside Systems ......... Web: <http://www.dirtside.com/>
>> May I solve your unusual networking challenges?
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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.
> _______________________________________________
> 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.