[arin-ppml] About needs basis in 8.3 transfers
mike at iptrading.com
Thu Jun 12 13:14:32 EDT 2014
"Use of the registry database for policy enforcement is not supportive of the primary reason for the existence of the registry system (there is a reason it's called a "registry"). It is also self-defeating. Get enough folks doing "transfers" outside of registry database and the database is no longer meaningful."
Yup, I suppose....and I guess it's no fault blaming those individuals who do not heed the community's standards by going outside of policy....no, let's consider ARIN to be at fault for responding to community consensus.
We consider ARIN policy to be at fault and are seeking community consensus to change that policy, Do you have a problem with that approach?
I know that what this back and forth is about....policy discussion and development....to see whether the community has had a see change...but what I see is that a few people who want it their way...continue to flame the status quo for maintaining its focus...to my mind...where it still should be. Scare resource? Given them to people who NEED them. If the community should be outrage about something, it should be those who contribute to the weakness of he database, not those who's stewardship has not failed.
Bill, nobody is *giving* addresses to anybody, regardless of their NEEDS, so you can disabuse yourself of that pie-eyed notion. And what is flaming the status quo? Way to encourage participation. I suppose it’s better to leave the community in their repose of silent focus.
Let’s cut out the stewardship failed nonsense, you are accusing both RIPE and APNIC communities of failed stewardship because their opinion doesn’t match your personal one.
On Thu, Jun 12, 2014 at 6:50 AM, David Conrad <drc at virtualized.org> wrote:
Gary and Bill,
On Jun 12, 2014, at 6:37 AM, Bill Darte <billdarte at gmail.com> wrote:
"need" is not the same as "want" (see the
$10K red button app that was offered for
awhile; can anyone explain why anyone
would "need" it). And while some may
exchange money for only "want"s, those
that can demonstrate "need" can get those
transfers approved today and have the
registry updated today. Only the "wants"
are having a hard time. And, in my opinion,
that is as it should be.
While I consider the angst associated with speculators (or whoever) buying up all the address space overblown (hint: it would merely shorten the already short time horizon of when IPv4 addresses are no longer practically available), the issue I'm most concerned with is "and have the registry updated today."
I do not believe given sufficient "want" and money that the lack of updating the registry would sufficient deterrent to preclude a "transfer" from occurring. The end result being that the address space is no longer traceable after the transfer.
Use of the registry database for policy enforcement is not supportive of the primary reason for the existence of the registry system (there is a reason it's called a "registry"). It is also self-defeating. Get enough folks doing "transfers" outside of registry database and the database is no longer meaningful.
I would have no issue with using other tools at ARIN's disposal for policy enforcement, e.g., removing reverse delegations, marking entries in the database as "out of policy" and letting ISPs decide for themselves whether to accept a prefix for routing, invoking contractual penalties, etc.
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