[arin-ppml] Draft Policy ARIN-2015-5: Out of region use

Milton L Mueller mueller at syr.edu
Fri Jul 3 11:34:07 EDT 2015

Comments inline
I agree with many of your arguments, especially this one:

> -----Original Message-----
> As of now.....  there is really no pool of scarce IPv4  resources to
> distribute according to local policies...
> The purpose of having multiple RIRs in the first place, instead of one
> global GIR    that can  allocate, register, transfer resources in any
> region,   is greatly diminished.

> I would suggest that Out of Region use be fully allowed for all
> resources,  with disclosure of the caveat that  optimal routing might be
> more limited for out of region usage.
> The only hard constraint should be that the resource holder must at all
> times provide and maintain a contact or agent with physical mailing
> address in one of the countries served by ARIN,  unless,  or until such
> time as there is a global registry.

I would note that the current version of "out of region use" allowance (2015-5) is designed to restrict out of region use far beyond these constraints. It requires companies to meet criteria that are, in effect, a jurisdictional nexus test. This was added to the policy because a) of concerns about gaming access to the free pool, a concern that is no longer salient; and b) objections from law enforcement agencies who would like to align number resources with jurisdiction. 

Although it might be possible for these provisions to mitigate that kind of opposition, the current policy is a step backwards rather than forwards in terms of actually allowing out of region use. I would be interested in hearing from community members whether they think the increasingly formalized "jurisdictionalization" of the number space fostered by 2015-5 is worth whatever gains might be obtained by formally approving out of region use for those who qualify


More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list