[arin-ppml] Draft Policy ARIN-2014-20: Transfer Policy Slow Start and Simplified Needs Verification
jcurran at arin.net
Mon Sep 22 22:53:19 EDT 2014
On Sep 22, 2014, at 1:05 PM, David Huberman <David.Huberman at microsoft.com> wrote:
> No one participating in the RIR system should be prevented from doing any
> bona fide transfer. In the 8.3 world, network operators must be free to buy
> and sell IP addresses as it fits their business plans.
The above premise implies a policy regime which must always confirm that
any transfer of IPv4 space is warranted based on some corresponding needs-
assessment of "business plans"...
Given that these forward-looking plans can change, what exactly is the
value in confirming that the transfer size "fits" with the particular
plans? What function is served by doing so?
> If we can agree on that, can
> we agree that any mechanism which forces a company to do multiple transfers
> or buy multiple blocks is a disservice to the community?
By any mechanism, do you mean like something such as a "24-month planning
horizon"? To put any limit on amount that can be transferred based on a
specific planning horizon will always result in multiple transfers over a
longer period. Is that a disservice to the community?
>> Do you see (per the proposal intent) any opportunities for simplification of present
>> transfer policy, either by changing the existing proposal or otherwise?
> I'm not going to say yes or not, wrt 2014-20. I don't know yet.
Many have advocated elimination of needs-assessment for transfers (and
2014-20 appears to do that for several situations); it seems conflicted
to argue for less hurdles for transfers, but also that transfers should
be sized to "fit business plans", i.e. committing ARIN and requestors
to time-intensive scrutiny of business and technical plans, as occurs in
the course of needs-assessment.
President and CEO
More information about the ARIN-PPML