[arin-ppml] ARIN-2019-7: Elimination of the Waiting List (was:Re: Looking for final show of support on revised Advisory Council Recommendation Regarding NRPM 4.1.8. Unmet Requests

Thu Jun 20 15:10:18 EDT 2019

I oppose the RIR to participate on any market place and thefore to keep the
waiting list, BUT limited to a maximum of /22 regardless of the size of who
request and ONLY for newcomers as it is in others RIRs.

A single /24 is useless for majority of uses, even for CGNAT and other
techniques that transition to IPv6. A /22 has been the most reasonable and
bare minimal size for companies to do a proper transition technique and an
ISP to properly exist and compete in the Internet. Anything less than a /22
is force one to suffer unecessarily.

Fernando

On Thu, 20 Jun 2019, 13:57 , <hostmaster at uneedus.com> wrote:

> Oppose
>
> I have no problem with the idea of getting rid of the waiting list part of
> the proposal.
>
> I do have a problem with an auction, as I think it will cause lots of
> issues when ARIN revokes resources, because it certainly will be alleged
> that "ARIN did it for the money", as has already been discussed, and will
> make any legal action a lot more costly. The Board choosing to use auction
> proceeds for legal costs would be like pouring gasoline on a fire, and I
> note that the Board could choose to spend auction proceeds in this
> fashion, since how to spend the proceeds is totally under their control.
>
> Rather than an auction, I propose putting the returns in the 4.10
> Dedicated IPv4 Block to Facilitate IPv6 Deployment.  This pool is limited
> to a /24 maximum.  This use would also promote IPv6 use.
>
> This would leave the marketplace as the only source of IPv4 addresses
> greater than a /24.  It would also effectively limit any "free" addresses
> to smaller players.
>
> If we are giving out "Free" addresses at ARIN, why not impose a condition
> that the addresses so provided be used as part of IPv6 deployment?
>
> Albert Erdmann
> Network Administrator
> Paradise On Line Inc.
>
> On Thu, 20 Jun 2019, Alyssa Moore wrote:
>
> > Hi folks,
> >
> > Trying to do a temperature check here. If you're following this thread,
> > please indicate whether you support or oppose this draft policy.
> >
> > On Mon, Jun 17, 2019 at 11:42 AM David Farmer <farmer at umn.edu> wrote:
> >
> >>
> >>
> >> On Sun, Jun 16, 2019 at 2:50 PM Mueller, Milton L <milton at gatech.edu>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>> OK, I’ve read it, and here is my reaction:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> This policy requires legal comment. ARIN’s Articles and Bylaws do not
> >>> specifically prohibit ARIN from monetizing returned or revoked
> resources by
> >>> selling those resources into the transfer market
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> So point #1 is that this proposed policy does not violate any articles
> or
> >>> bylaws.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Today, ARIN does not financially benefit in any material way from such
> >>> revocations. Adoption of this policy would for the first time allow the
> >>> party in a contested revocation situation to argue that ARIN seeks to
> >>> financially benefit. Avoiding that concern is also significant.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> I am totally unimpressed with this argument. If ARIN revokes addresses
> >>> for nonpayment it is financially benefiting from the revocation is it
> not?
> >>> It is basically taking them back because it is not getting paid.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> If ARIN “gets paid” by selling the numbers into the transfer market
> what
> >>> is the difference exactly?
> >>>
> >>
> >> Referring to the waiting list policy, the Draft Policy says, "this
> policy
> >> provides valuable number resources essentially for free".
> >>
> >> Yes, ARIN currently financially benefits, but currently, that benefit is
> >> at a level of cost recovery, "essentially for free" as stated above.
> >> Whereas, if ARIN were to dispose of resources using the market, the
> level
> >> of financial benefit is likely to be orders of magnitude larger.
> >> Furthermore, if this wasn't the case, then the impact on the market and
> the
> >> potential for fraud supposedly created by the waiting list, that the
> draft
> >> policy proposes to mitigate, wouldn't exist in the first place.
> >>
> >> In short, "what is the difference", probably, several orders of
> magnitude
> >> in the level of financial benefit involved. Where the financial
> motivations
> >> from simple "cost recovery" can probably be summarily dismissed by the
> >> court. Whereas the potential financial motivations, that one might even
> >> call a windfall, from market-based transactions probably at least needs
> to
> >> be examined and evaluated by the court, and probably wouldn't be
> summarily
> >> dismissed. The outcome of the two situations might be the same in the
> end,
> >> but the level of effort involved defending and the level of risk of an
> >> adverse ruling, are not the same at all.
> >>
> >> More generally, ARIN participating in the market seems distasteful and
> >> counter to its overall mission, but doesn't directly violate its
> Articles
> >> and Bylaws.
> >>
> >> That said that doesn't mean ARIN can't implement the policy, but these
> >> risks need to be evaluated when compared to other alternatives being
> >> considered, along with the possible benefits this policy could have as
> well.
> >>
> >> --
> >> ===============================================
> >> David Farmer               Email:farmer at umn.edu
> >> Networking & Telecommunication Services
> >> Office of Information Technology
> >> University of Minnesota
> >> 2218 University Ave SE        Phone: 612-626-0815
> >> Minneapolis, MN 55414-3029   Cell: 612-812-9952
> >> ===============================================
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> ARIN-PPML
> >> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
> >> the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML at arin.net).
> >> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
> >> https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
> >> Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.
> >>
> >_______________________________________________
> ARIN-PPML
> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
> the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML at arin.net).
> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
> https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
> Please contact 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/20190620/6871f61a/attachment.htm>