[arin-ppml] Team Review - policy matter? (was: Re: reverse COE statement)

Owen DeLong owen at delong.com
Wed Sep 24 19:01:07 EDT 2014

On Sep 24, 2014, at 3:50 PM, John Curran <jcurran at arin.net> wrote:

> On Sep 24, 2014, at 6:26 PM, Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com> wrote:
>> On Sep 24, 2014, at 2:03 PM, John Curran <jcurran at arin.net> wrote:
>>> ...
>>> ARIN's IPv4 Countdown Plan is quite similar to the serialization 
>>> and review of requests that APNIC and RIPE performed as part of
>>> their IPv4 pool runout plans, and originated in order to provide
>>> for fair treatment of requests from the free pool as we approach
>>> runout.  Team review of requests (where the entire analyst staff
>>> gathers to process the request queue) is not efficient, but does
>>> provide benefits for serialization in processing of requests. It
>>> is unclear how that would be at all beneficial for IPv4 transfers
>>> and it definitely would impact IPv4 transfer processing times.
>> I doubt it would be beneficial to transfers. However, I don’t think it is fair for transfers to be expedited and handled faster than free pool requests.
>> I believe it is a fairness issue, not an efficiency issue.
> Owen -
> Once the IPv4 free pool is depleted, would you suggest still 
> continuing the team review process for all IPv4 transfers going 
> forward?  

I think that depends. If the supply continues to exceed demand, probably not. At the point where transfer demand exceeds supply and transfers start developing a waiting list, then it might make sense. I trust staff to use good judgment for this.

What I don’t want to see is undue advantages being given to transfers over free-pool requests during a time when both are possible.

I do not believe ARIN should be creating incentives to use transfers vs. the free pool. As I said, as long as both remain, fairness should, IMHO, dictate that they be treated the same.


More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list