[arin-ppml] support for 2014-1 (out of region use)

[Bill Darte]

Bill said..."ARIN prohibits any use of ARIN-assigned number resources which
is:
(A) wholly and unambiguously within another RIR's region and
(B) more than incidental to an ARIN-region infrastructure."

I think much of our earlier (and unsuccessful) effort was to codify what
'incidental' meant and a metric which was suitable for recognizing the
threshold....

bd


On Fri, Feb 7, 2014 at 4:49 PM, William Herrin <bill at herrin.us> wrote:

> On Thu, Feb 6, 2014 at 9:41 AM, Milton L Mueller <mueller at syr.edu> wrote:
> > Draft policy 2014-1 attempts to solve a problem left over from last year.
>
> Howdy,
>
> As I understood the staff problem, it was that out-region
> organizations were creating in-region straw-man companies to register
> addresses for use outside the region. During the discussion this
> turned in to a more general referendum on whether ARIN should be
> supplying addresses to the world or just to its region.
>
> If I had my druthers, the policy would be simply this:
>
> "ARIN prohibits any use of ARIN-assigned number resources which is:
> (A) wholly and unambiguously within another RIR's region and
> (B) more than incidental to an ARIN-region infrastructure."
>
> It's concise, it's clean, and it says everything that should be said
> on the subject.
>
>
> I don't know if it's wise or unwise to have REGIONAL internet
> registries, but so long as we do I think it inappropriate for one
> region to UNILATERALLY serve as a registry to the world.
>
>
> For better or for worse, I was shouted down. Many of the voting folks
> here have broadly deployed ARIN addresses throughout their
> multinational infrastructure and don't care to be scolded for it.
> Others have used straw man companies in their own operations to
> overcome the intersection of their internal bureaucracy and the arcane
> strictures of the NRPM. They'd just as soon not have ARIN staff look
> any closer. And let's not forget that a goodly fraction of the folks
> who show up at ARIN meetings primarily represent out-region interests
> in the first place.
>
> What really gets my goat is the rationalizations I've seen put forth
> for why so-and-so's out-region use is legit. Waah. I can't possibly
> make my allocation pools match my customers' installation addresses.
> Waah. I don't want to have to deal with RIPE for my European
> infrastructure. Boo frickin' hoo. Man up and admit that the reason you
> don't want this policy is that you've knowingly been doing things
> wrong for the last decade plus, and you don't want to have to change.
>
> Once you've admitted it, add another sentence to the brief suggested
> policy:
>
> "ARIN number resources in use outside the region upon enaction of this
> policy are grandfathered until recovered from their then-current
> assignment."
>
> Regards.
> Bill Herrin
>
>
>
>
> --
> William D. Herrin ................ herrin at dirtside.com  bill at herrin.us
> 3005 Crane Dr. ...................... Web: <http://bill.herrin.us/>
> Falls Church, VA 22042-3004
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20140207/6ba6b2b9/attachment.htm>