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

[William Herrin]

On Wed, Dec 24, 2014 at 2:53 PM, John Curran <jcurran at arin.net> wrote:
> On Dec 24, 2014, at 2:26 PM, William Herrin <bill at herrin.us> wrote:
>> 2. I disagree with spinning it as an existing policy flaw. There's a
>> ARIN -implementation- flaw here. Classically and consistent with the
>> spirit of ICP2, the RIRs allow minor outregion use of addresses that's
>> incidental to an in-region operation. And you know what? You haven't
>> been the slightest bit shy about deciding that external documents like
>> ICP2 and RFC2050 constrain ARIN activity in other matters like the /10
>> for large scale NAT. I don't know how ARIN got itself twisted up where
>> it couldn't find the limits of "minor" and "incidental" but trying to
>> override that with rigid policy requirements is going to be
>> problematic.
>
>
> With respect to incidental out-of-region usage, you are incorrect in that
> we presently do allow such incidental usage, but the resources that are
> requested must be based upon demand within the region.  This point has been
> explained several times, including in the ARIN 31 Policy Experience Report
> <https://www.arin.net/participate/meetings/reports/ARIN_31/PDF/monday/nobile_policy.pdf>


Hi John,

I understand this statement to mean that ARIN currently deems ARIN
addresses employed on equipment outside the region to be "unused" when
determining a registrant's qualification. Is that correct? This is
different than my understanding of the referenced document which, to
me, implies that use outside the region is considered if the
organization exists as a legal entity within the region. Staff then
express frustration at how to verify utilization of those addresses
used outside the region.

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?