[arin-ppml] On IPv4 free pool runout and transfer policy requirements for the ARIN region

John Curran jcurran at arin.net
Fri Jun 5 13:40:30 EDT 2015

On Jun 5, 2015, at 1:25 PM, William Herrin <bill at herrin.us> wrote:
> ...
> Fairness. Free trade is and must be a two-way street. Don't have that
> if we let someone pay lip service to free trade and then act as a
> proxy for a third party who's gaming the system.

Bill - 
  Could you elaborate?     A party X in ARIN region wishes to transfer to
  party Y in region “R”.    You wish to predicate ARIN’s ability to process
  such a transfer on whether or not other parties in region “R” are allowed
  to transfer to folks in the ARIN region?   How is this fair to “X” or “Y”,
  who simply are trying to get resources to where they are needed?

>> Is /25 "unusually small”?
> The nice thing about my way is that ARIN need never make that call. It
> need only warn registrants and then let them make the call.

Registrants will make that call, but ISP’s have often looked to the RIRs
to take the lead in determining what block size makes sense, and then
made their routing decisions accordingly.   In allowing smaller block sizes,
isn’t that an implicit endorsement that ISPs should consider routing such?


John Curran
President and CEO

More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list