[arin-ppml] 2016-3 Revisited

[Owen DeLong]

No, Mike, You are missing that “an organization’s business purpose” may be something other than “running an operational network”.

We are attempting to ensure that the addresses go to those who intend to use them in an operational network, rather than treating them as a commodity futures investment, speculative transaction, or other financial manipulation at the expense of the internet.

Even RIPE requires you to use at least half of the addresses on an operational network.

Owen

> On Feb 3, 2017, at 07:53 , Mike Burns <mike at iptrading.com> wrote:
> 
> Hi David,
>  
> I appreciate you trying to make me understand.
> So are you assuming in your example that you seek to purchase space that you do not need for your business purposes.
> My argument is that organizations do not purchase space for which they don’t feel there is a valid business purpose.  Now it’s true that an organization’s perception of need will vary from the one which is being rigorously defined here, but there is an obvious brake on the purchase of items for which there is not a business purpose.
>  
> And for those whom we are imagining who are determined to somehow go around policy to acquire un-necessary space, there are already plenty of workarounds, the simplest of which is to acquire RIPE space.
>  
> Am I missing something obvious that requires this additional complexity to what was a nice smooth section of the NRPM?  
>  
> Regards,
> Mike
>  
>  
> From: David Huberman [mailto:daveid at panix.com <mailto:daveid at panix.com>] 
> Sent: Friday, February 03, 2017 10:43 AM
> To: Mike Burns <mike at iptrading.com <mailto:mike at iptrading.com>>
> Cc: Jason Schiller <jschiller at google.com <mailto:jschiller at google.com>>; arin-ppml at arin.net <mailto:arin-ppml at arin.net>
> Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] 2016-3 Revisited
>  
> Mike,
>  
> I buy a /13. I abuse the spirit of 2016-3, meant for smaller transfers as our first attempt at no needs testing, by reiterating /16 transfers one after the other.
>  
> Market pricing doesn't stop this, and the ARIN community who participates in public policy matters has made it clear that an incremental approach towards needs testing is a good thing.
>  
> David
> 
> Sent from my iPhone
> 
> On Feb 3, 2017, at 10:34 AM, Mike Burns <mike at iptrading.com <mailto:mike at iptrading.com>> wrote:
> 
>>  
>> If that approach still doesn't work can you suggest some other mechanism to prevent abuse that does not prevent an organization who needs IP space from using this policy?  
>>  
>>  
>> Hi Jason,
>>  
>> Why are we ignoring the mechanism that prevents organizations from buying un-needed anything? To wit, they have to pay money for these addresses. You guys are spinning up unlikely scenarios and ignoring the 800lb. elephant in the room… the cost of these addresses is the mechanism you seek.  
>>  
>> Regards,
>> Mike
>>  
> _______________________________________________
> PPML
> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
> the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML at arin.net <mailto:ARIN-PPML at arin.net>).
> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml <http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml>
> Please contact info at arin.net <mailto:info at arin.net> if you experience any issues.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20170203/623404bf/attachment.htm>