[arin-ppml] support for 2014-1 (out of region use)
scottleibrand at gmail.com
Mon Feb 10 11:53:43 EST 2014
So are you in favor of or opposed to 2014-1, which explicitly permits
out-of-region use? It sounds like you're opposed to efforts to "do
something here" that restricts allocations based on region. Since you
think "policies, if they are to be adopted, ought to reinforce the
historically permissive stance ARIN has taken", do you favor 2014-1 as
written? Or do you have any suggestions for how to improve it?
On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 7:30 AM, Andrew Sullivan <ajs at anvilwalrusden.com>wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 09:02:13AM -0600, David Farmer wrote:
> > We (globally) created a run-out scheme that was going to be uneven.
> > There was at least one rejected proposal that tried to even out the
> > run-out across the RIRs. Unfortunately, I think we just need to
> > live with the consequences of our actions, or inaction in this case.
> > As the problem statement says, I think the real problem is that
> > policy is ambiguous on the subject of out of region use. Which
> > means there are some in the community that think out of region use
> > is outside the rules, as you seem to think. Then others think it is
> > perfectly normal and has always been allowed, because its never been
> > disallowed in policy. I think we need to clarify that out of region
> > use was always intended to be allowed by policy.
> I am normally loathe to say "+1", but I have to agree very strongly
> with the above. The impulse to try to do something here is
> well-intended but badly misguided. It will have negative side effects
> as one tries to write exceptional exceptions for the exceptionally
> exceptional case. The reason clichés are cliché is that they express
> a truth, and in this case the cliché, "Hard cases make bad law,"
> applies. New policies, if they are to be adopted, ought to reinforce
> the historically permissive stance ARIN has taken.
> Will that have the consequence that some will come "out of region" and
> incorporate for convenience and try to corner the market on the
> remaining IPv4? Yes. The idea that ARIN can make a policy that will
> successfully stanch the well-known problems of speculation and gaming
> in commodity markets during scarcity and without doing incidental
> damage is, I think, too ambitious.
> Best regards,
> Andrew (I work for Dyn. The above remarks may not reflect their
> Andrew Sullivan
> ajs at anvilwalrusden.com
> 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:
> Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the ARIN-PPML