[arin-ppml] Draft Policy ARIN-2015-2: Modify 8.4 (Inter-RIR Transfers to Specified Recipients)

[John Curran]

On May 26, 2015, at 6:23 PM, William Herrin <bill at herrin.us> wrote:
> 
> On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 6:05 PM, John Curran <jcurran at arin.net> wrote:
>> The reason for regional registries was not intended for policy
>> purposes, but for administrative convenience for those requesting
>> resources (such as local hours and language support)
> 
> Hi John,
> 
> If you propose that the registries' structure is intended to offer IP
> addressing "flags of convenience" comparable to what happens with
> international shipping, please say so plainly. That approach would
> certainly justify ITU setting up shop as a sixth world-level registry
> serving governments and international telephony organizations.
> 
> If that's not your intention, then I frankly have no idea what the
> quoted statement is supposed to mean and would invite you to clarify
> it further.

Bill - 
 
   I was pointing out that the mission of ARIN can be quite large if the
   community desires such, but it is important to remember that the 
   Regional Internet Registry system (whose origins one can find in 
   RFC 1174) came about in order to scale operational assignment
   and registration on an international basis, i.e. -  

   The regionalization is not "flags of convenience” situation; it was 
   intended to “further the Internet” in the operation of the overall registry.
   Furthermore,  the RIR system was not intended as a mechanism  for
   the creation of different policy among the regions; that happened as
   new policy was created (such as the transfer policies) on a regional
   basis.

FYI,
/John

John Curran
President and CEO
ARIN