[arin-ppml] About needs basis in 8.3 transfers

Owen DeLong owen at delong.com
Wed Jun 4 00:11:26 EDT 2014


Yes, David, an organization can be a bad actor and tie up excess resources without transferring them in violation of the spirit and intent of the policy.

Or, you could recognize that the intent of the policy and the reason for that policy is to make those addresses available to other entities with a more immediate need and behave in the spirit of the community.

We can’t make the letter of the law force all organizations to be good actors. It’s just not practical. The best we can do is provide policy that expresses the general intent of the community and hope that the majority of people and organizations are good actors.

So while your ability to circumvent the intent of the policy within the “letter of the law” is not in the interest of the community, compliance with the spirit and intent of the policy is, in fact good for the operator community. Of course, it is inevitably up to each organization whether to act as a good citizen of the community or not. This is true even in cases where the policy is iron clad and there are certainly no shortage of examples of bad actors throughout history.

Owen

On Jun 3, 2014, at 12:31 PM, David Huberman <David.Huberman at microsoft.com> wrote:

> We had a discussion today at NANOG in the ARIN PPC about needs-basis in 8.3 transfers. 
>  
> I’d like to state the following, and then let’s see where the discussion takes us:
>  
> My team runs an AS. And yep, we’re a pretty big company.  We rely on IPv4 today for most of our numbering, and will continue to do so for the next couple of years.[1]  In the coming year, when we can’t get space from ARIN or other RIRs, we have to turn to the market for our IP address needs.   We may choose to buy more than a 2 year supply, because it may make business sense for us to do so.   ARIN policy, however, only allows us to take the IP addresses we buy and transfer the portion which represents a 2 year need.   The rest will remain in the name of whoever sold the IP addresses to us.
>  
> Why is this result good for the operator community?  Wouldn’t it be better if ARIN rules allowed us to transfer into our name all the IP addresses which we now own?
>  
> Regards,
> /david
>  
> [1] We’re working on increasing IPv6 presence in our network and our products, but large corporations move slowly ;)
>  
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20140603/fa28d844/attachment.html>


More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list