[arin-ppml] FW: Draft Policy ARIN-2014-20: Transfer Policy Slow Start and Simplified Needs Verification
kkargel at polartel.com
Tue Sep 23 10:56:34 EDT 2014
Sorry, I neglected to include the list in my reply to M. Mueller.
From: Kevin Kargel
Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2014 9:32 AM
To: 'Milton L Mueller'
Subject: RE: [arin-ppml] Draft Policy ARIN-2014-20: Transfer Policy Slow Start and Simplified Needs Verification
What about your religious insistence of IP as a product?
I stick to my guns that ARIN should support IP as a network resource. I also stick to my guns that ARIN should not support IP as a commodity.
Making " technically sound and economically efficient rules for market transfers" is not and should not be ARIN's job, at least not as it supports transfer as a profit market.
ARIN's job is shepherding IP allocations for network operation, not for profit trading.
I agree that when the free pool is exhausted that the only way to get additional IP will be through the market. If anything this increases the responsibility of ARIN to monitor and shepherd transfers through that venue. Needs assessment will be even more important post-runout.
Your statement that I should advocate ARIN getting away from needs assessment entirely is completely duplicitous. If anything ARIN should get more firmly entrenched in needs assessment to protect the honest network operators from the profit takers.
I am saddened to hear that you feel justified in discounting opinions that do not align with your own for AC deliberations. That certainly makes a strong statement.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Milton L Mueller [mailto:mueller at syr.edu]
> Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2014 9:09 AM
> To: Kevin Kargel; arin-ppml at arin.net
> Subject: RE: [arin-ppml] Draft Policy ARIN-2014-20: Transfer Policy
> Slow Start and Simplified Needs Verification
> > -----Original Message-----
> > I do not believe IP as commodity is good for either operators,
> > industry or the community. It will however serve as a wealth
> > generator for a select few, which again is not the objective of ARIN.
> > The good or bad of IP as a commodity is probably not the discussion
> > though. I apologize if I generated thread drift.
> IP as a commodity is now a settled issue. We certainly are not debating that.
> However, your kind of religious opposition to market transfers often
> leads to expressions of opposition to policies that attempt to make
> the transfer markets work better for operators. I want to make it
> clear that I will not count that as serious or justifiable opposition
> to a policy proposal in any AC deliberations.
> Your contention that ARIN should not support commodity trades is
> negated completely by a simple logic:
> IF there is no more free pool, the only way to get additional v4
> numbers is through the market. Ergo, ARIN's mission of number
> allocation requires it to make technically sound and economically
> efficient rules for market transfers of number blocks. IF ARIN doesn't do that, it isn't doing its job.
> Further, if ARIN insists on validating need before before allowing
> number blocks to be transferred, then ARIN is by definition validating
> and supporting commodity sales. So if you want to be consistent about
> ARIN avoiding any support for commoditization of numbers, you should
> advocate that ARIN get out of the business of needs assessment for
> transfers entirely. Then it would be neither supporting nor involving itself in commodity transfers.
More information about the ARIN-PPML