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

Milton L Mueller mueller at syr.edu
Fri Dec 26 09:30:16 EST 2014

> -----Original Message-----
> From: arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net [mailto:arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net]
> On Behalf Of William Herrin
> I'm don't think there is such a change but there are a few things that jump
> out at me as being particularly offensive.
> 1. This issue is not a concern for ARIN number resources overall. Now and for
> the foreseeable future it frankly only matters for IPv4 addresses. Crafting a

Actually the policy was written primarily with v6 in mind, because the v4 free pool will soon be exhausted, but the principle should apply to all number spaces. And I believe that the only reason you oppose this is the false and contrary-to-principle idea that North Americans "own" their remaining v4 numbers simply by virtue of the fact they happened to run out slower than other regions. 

> No one here
> cares whether AS numbers or IPv6 addresses are used out-region and

I am glad you have conceded this because it dispenses with the "this is all contrary to ICP2" nonsense. If AS numbers and IPv6 numbers can be obtained from one RIR for global use then there is no reason why v4 numbers can't be - the principle is the same. 

> 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

I think John has refuted this.

> 3. Registry shopping is a bad bad bad idea. It defeats and is directly contrary
> to the whole ICP2 spirit of LOCAL self-governance. As written, this policy

I don't agree. I think uneven runout and the resulting arbitrage has shown us why territorial registries are a bad bad bad idea. There is some justification for having more localized participatory structures to deal with language differences and to improve access, but many companies that are trans-regional have every right to decide which of these regions is most convenient to them and rely exclusively on that. Asking every company with a presence in more than one region to duplicate (or triplicate or quadruplicate, etc.) their investment in monitoring and obtaining numbers is just bad bad bad bad policy. I have no idea what you think it accomplishes, other than hoarding for a particular region. Your idea that this is about "local self-governance" is a distortion and corruption of the original idea of address registries. They are not territorially exclusive governments with "sovereignty" and the users within them are not territorially exclusive either. This is a globalized world and the internet was designed to be global. Stop fighting over the remaining crumbs of IPv4 and face that fact.


More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list