<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1" http-equiv=Content-Type>
<META name=GENERATOR content="MSHTML 8.00.6001.19046">
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY
style="WORD-WRAP: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space"
bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial><FONT size=3 face="Times New Roman">>It seems
the community is</FONT>
<DIV>>rather divided with some advocating a complete abandonment</DIV>
<DIV>>of the principles of stewardship in favor of a laissez faire</DIV>
<DIV>>address economy while others favor preservation of the</DIV>
<DIV>>principles of stewardship and justified need while enabling</DIV>
<DIV>>market incentives to free up space.</DIV>
<DIV>>Owen</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial>Removing artificial restrictions on the
transfer of IP address space is not, as Owen persists in characterizing it, an
abandonment of the principles of stewardship.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial>Stewardship simply means different things pre- and
post-exhaust.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial>Pre-exhaust requires needs analyses to ensure
efficient use of address space.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial>Post-exahust, efficient use is ensured by the same
market incentives you claim enables the freeing up of space.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial>To wit, price.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial>I don't believe that there has been an answer to
those of us who said that while it is grammatically acceptable to decide that a
"single aggregate" relates to the needs justification, it is nonsensical to do
that, as all needs analyses result in a single aggregate. You don't have a needs
analysis at any time where it is found that a need is outside CIDR boundaries.
Need assessment has always rounded up to that boundary.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial>No, the only way to interpret the language of 8.3
is that the reception of the addresses should occur as a single aggregate, which
is clear has not occurred with 8.3.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial>To say the staff or the board acted outside of
policy is correct in the MS/Nortel case.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial>Regards,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial>Mike</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial></FONT> </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT: 10pt arial; BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; font-color: black"><B>From:</B>
<A title=owen@delong.com href="mailto:owen@delong.com">Owen DeLong</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A title=rudi.daniel@gmail.com
href="mailto:rudi.daniel@gmail.com">Rudolph Daniel</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Cc:</B> <A title=arin-ppml@arin.net
href="mailto:arin-ppml@arin.net">arin-ppml@arin.net</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Monday, May 02, 2011 3:44 PM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: [arin-ppml] NRPN 8.2 &
2.3</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>At this point, I would agree. However, I would like to wait
until I
<DIV>get a chance to discuss the matter with ARIN Counsel and</DIV>
<DIV>further discuss it with staff before I start crafting proposals</DIV>
<DIV>to do so.</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>I don't feel that staff or the board have acted improperly. I think</DIV>
<DIV>that policy failed to express the community intent well enough</DIV>
<DIV>as to achieve or goals.</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>I will continue to work on finding a way to bring policy better in</DIV>
<DIV>line with community intent, but, the hard part will be achieving</DIV>
<DIV>consensus on what that intent is. It seems the community is</DIV>
<DIV>rather divided with some advocating a complete abandonment</DIV>
<DIV>of the principles of stewardship in favor of a laissez faire</DIV>
<DIV>address economy while others favor preservation of the</DIV>
<DIV>principles of stewardship and justified need while enabling</DIV>
<DIV>market incentives to free up space.</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>It is most unfortunate that we failed to produce clear policy</DIV>
<DIV>in 2009-1. I hope we can correct it at Philadelphia.</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>Owen</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV>On Apr 30, 2011, at 6:48 PM, Rudolph Daniel wrote:</DIV><BR
class=Apple-interchange-newline>
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite">It would seem clear to me that at the very least,
NRPN 8.2 and 8.3 requires rephrasing. Is that also the view of the ppml?
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>rd<BR>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV><BR>
<DIV>
<DIV class=gmail_quote>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="BORDER-LEFT: #ccc 1px solid; MARGIN: 0px 0px 0px 0.8ex; PADDING-LEFT: 1ex"
class=gmail_quote>>> for such resources, as a single aggregate", not
that a single<BR>>> aggregate be transferred.<BR>><BR>> ... I
do not believe that Stephen's interpretation below matches the<BR>>
meaning or the intent of the policy as I understand it. ...<BR><BR>I don't
think it does either, for the record. However, this points
out<BR>how bad wording has left us in a situation where we're not sure
/what/<BR>the policy text means--much less whether we agree with
it.<BR><BR>> I do agree that your interpretation would be a
syntactically and<BR>> grammatically valid construction, but, I
believe it is contextually<BR>> nonsensical and not the intended
meaning of the words.<BR>><BR>> If anyone has a suggestion for
making the actual intent more clear, I<BR>> am open to suggestions and
would support making an editorial<BR>> correction for
clarity.<BR><BR>If you can provide examples of transfers you both do and
don't wish to<BR>allow, I'll be happy to come up with wording to express
your intent. As<BR>it stands, though, I don't understand your (or
anyone else's) intent<BR>well enough to try.<BR><BR>S<BR><BR>--<BR>Stephen
Sprunk "God does not play dice."
--Albert Einstein<BR>CCIE #3723 "God is
an inveterate gambler, and He throws the<BR>K5SSS
dice at every possible opportunity." --Stephen
Hawking<BR><BR>-------------- next part --------------<BR>An HTML
attachment was scrubbed...<BR>URL: <<A
href="http://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20110430/ab367759/attachment-0001.html"
target=_blank>http://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20110430/ab367759/attachment-0001.html</A>><BR>--------------
next part --------------<BR>A non-text attachment was scrubbed...<BR>Name:
smime.p7s<BR>Type: application/pkcs7-signature<BR>Size: 3646
bytes<BR>Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature<BR>URL: <<A
href="http://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20110430/ab367759/attachment-0001.bin"
target=_blank>http://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20110430/ab367759/attachment-0001.bin</A>><BR><BR>------------------------------<BR><BR>Message:
2<BR>Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2011 20:28:39 -0400<BR>From: William Herrin <<A
href="mailto:bill@herrin.us">bill@herrin.us</A>><BR>To: John Curran
<<A href="mailto:jcurran@arin.net">jcurran@arin.net</A>><BR>Cc:
Public Policy Mailing List <<A
href="mailto:ppml@arin.net">ppml@arin.net</A>><BR>Subject: Re:
[arin-ppml] Call for a study & survey to obtain necessary<BR>
information for policy development<BR>Message-ID:
<BANLkTi=0i9isaCTnsTQC9NO=<A
href="mailto:PX2RAcSt1A@mail.gmail.com">PX2RAcSt1A@mail.gmail.com</A>><BR>Content-Type:
text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1<BR><BR>On Sat, Apr 30, 2011 at 7:51 AM,
John Curran <<A href="mailto:jcurran@arin.net">jcurran@arin.net</A>>
wrote:<BR>> ? contains a specific call for ARIN to charter a study
including<BR>> ? a survey in order to obtain additional information to
assist in<BR>> ? policy development.<BR>><BR>> ? I've not seen
any discussion of this suggestion; would it be<BR>> ? possible to get
feedback from the otherwise shy participants<BR>> ? on the PPML mailing
list?<BR>><BR>> On Apr 29, 2011, at 5:46 PM, Jeffrey Lyon
wrote:<BR>>> what we should do is<BR>>> charter ARIN to
conduct a comprehensive study and:<BR>>><BR>>> - Conduct a
survey of the public at large, PPML users, full members,<BR>>>
resource holders, and the AC to gain a clear understanding of<BR>>>
sentiment for or against an open market.<BR>>> - Determine how many
companies actually have IPv6 migration plans and<BR>>> ascertain
road blocks, either legitimate or financial, that are<BR>>>
preventing migration.<BR>>> - Would resource holders support a model
that allowed ARIN to take a<BR>>> small commission on resource sales
and then discontinue the practice<BR>>> of charging an annual fee to
its members who are not buying and<BR>>> selling
resources.<BR><BR>These seem like they could be determined by
survey.<BR><BR><BR>>> - In the survey, ask IPv4 resource holders to
anonymously disclose<BR>>> their true utilization rates and
determine if companies are hoarding<BR>>> resources either in hopes
of future resale or to cover an arbitrary<BR>>> future
need.<BR>>> - Determine the amount of participants that would come
forward if told<BR>>> they could resell their space on the open
market and ultimately<BR>>> determine how much unneeded space is
being locked away in loosely<BR>>> justified
allocations.<BR>>> - Determine if resource holders would be
encouraged to tighten up<BR>>> internal policies and free up more
space if there were a fair market<BR>>> value assigned to their
space.<BR><BR>These strike me as very difficult to determine by anything
approaching<BR>a statistically valid survey. I would want to see a
detailed<BR>methodology proposed before agreeing either that money should
be spent<BR>conducting the survey or that the results would have merit
to<BR>contribute to the policy debate.<BR><BR><BR>>> - Determine the
economic impact. Would resource holders be better off<BR>>> selling
their resources to more affluent companies who would be able<BR>>>
to put the space to better use? Might there be a host of
struggling<BR>>> small businesses who would like to put their /17 -
/21 on the balance<BR>>> sheet? Are there companies that would
purchase IPv4 space at a premium<BR>>> if allowed to do
so?<BR><BR>This would require a cost analysis of a great many factors,
only some<BR>of which have been touched on in the listed survey. Given the
abject<BR>lack of use of cost analysis in the Internet industry, it
would<BR>require at least three independent cost analyses and
considerable<BR>subsequent debate on and validation of the
methodologies...<BR><BR>Start here: <A href="http://www.sceaonline.net/"
target=_blank>http://www.sceaonline.net/</A><BR><BR>Disclaimer: my father
is a crotchety old cost analyst so I get a<BR>regular earful about this
stuff.<BR><BR>Regards,<BR>Bill Herrin<BR><BR><BR>--<BR>William D. Herrin
................ <A
href="mailto:herrin@dirtside.com">herrin@dirtside.com</A>? <A
href="mailto:bill@herrin.us">bill@herrin.us</A><BR>3005 Crane Dr.
...................... Web: <<A href="http://bill.herrin.us/"
target=_blank>http://bill.herrin.us/</A>><BR>Falls Church, VA
22042-3004<BR><BR><BR>------------------------------<BR><BR>Message:
3<BR>Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2011 20:39:08 -0400<BR>From: William Herrin <<A
href="mailto:bill@herrin.us">bill@herrin.us</A>><BR>To: Owen DeLong
<<A href="mailto:owen@delong.com">owen@delong.com</A>><BR>Cc: John
Curran <<A href="mailto:jcurran@arin.net">jcurran@arin.net</A>>,
arin-ppml <<A
href="mailto:arin-ppml@arin.net">arin-ppml@arin.net</A>><BR>Subject:
Re: [arin-ppml] Analogies<BR>Message-ID: <BANLkTimzAx7_S=<A
href="mailto:oaHiEB2epuXmMiBc136w@mail.gmail.com">oaHiEB2epuXmMiBc136w@mail.gmail.com</A>><BR>Content-Type:
text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1<BR><BR>On Sat, Apr 30, 2011 at 1:31 AM,
Owen DeLong <<A href="mailto:owen@delong.com">owen@delong.com</A>>
wrote:<BR>> I will point out that ARIN is the only registry that did
not start<BR>> charging their legacy holders shortly after coming into
existence.<BR>><BR>> APNIC, RIPE, AfriNIC, and LACNIC all charge
their legacy holders<BR>> annual fees to the best of my
knowledge.<BR>><BR>> I do not know whether a contract was required
in any or all cases,<BR>> but, the fee portion of the equation is
unique to ARIN to the best<BR>> of my knowledge.<BR><BR>Hi
Owen,<BR><BR>I will suggest that an attempt by ARIN to charge $100/year
under a<BR>contract simplified to, "We agree to keep your whois data and
RDNS<BR>delegations intact as is for one year increments until either of
us<BR>choose to cancel this contract" would meet with at most
mild<BR>resistance from the legacy registrants. It would also, IMHO,
provide<BR>an excellent way to weed out the abandoned
registrations.<BR><BR>This hasn't been done in part because we, in this
forum, have insisted<BR>that legacy registrants should not be invited into
the fold under such<BR>terms.<BR><BR>Regards,<BR>Bill
Herrin<BR><BR><BR>--<BR>William D. Herrin ................ <A
href="mailto:herrin@dirtside.com">herrin@dirtside.com</A>? <A
href="mailto:bill@herrin.us">bill@herrin.us</A><BR>3005 Crane Dr.
...................... Web: <<A href="http://bill.herrin.us/"
target=_blank>http://bill.herrin.us/</A>><BR>Falls Church, VA
22042-3004<BR><BR><BR>------------------------------<BR><BR>Message:
4<BR>Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2011 20:43:29 -0400<BR>From: "Mike Burns" <<A
href="mailto:mike@nationwideinc.com">mike@nationwideinc.com</A>><BR>To:
"Stephen Sprunk" <<A
href="mailto:stephen@sprunk.org">stephen@sprunk.org</A>>,
"Owen DeLong"<BR> <<A
href="mailto:owen@delong.com">owen@delong.com</A>><BR>Cc: <A
href="mailto:arin-ppml@arin.net">arin-ppml@arin.net</A><BR>Subject: Re:
[arin-ppml] ARIN / Microsoft press release regarding IP<BR>
addressTransfers<BR>Message-ID:
<7B6110E30D2E40CDA7E10BCB85E290B7@video><BR>Content-Type:
text/plain; charset="utf-8"<BR><BR>>If you can provide examples of
transfers you both do and don't wish to allow, I'll be happy to come up
with wording to express your intent. As it stands, though, I
>don't understand your (or anyone else's) intent well enough to
try.<BR><BR>>S<BR><BR>Steve,<BR><BR>Here is why I call BS on the claim
that these transfers comply with policy:<BR><BR>"Such transferred number
resources may only be received under RSA by organizations that are within
the ARIN region and can demonstrate the need for such resources, as a
single aggregate, in the exact amount which they can justify under current
ARIN policies."<BR><BR>That is the text. The comma between resources and
"as a single aggregate" can be read to cause the "as a single aggregate"
clause to apply to either the verb phrase "be received" or the verb phrase
"can demonstrate."<BR><BR>But how would anybody demonstrate a need for
multiple netblocks anyway?<BR>Isn't the need ALWAYS determined as a single
aggregate?<BR><BR>Regards,<BR><BR>Mike<BR><BR><BR><BR> ----- Original
Message -----<BR> From: Stephen Sprunk<BR> To: Owen
DeLong<BR> Cc: <A
href="mailto:arin-ppml@arin.net">arin-ppml@arin.net</A><BR> Sent:
Saturday, April 30, 2011 8:27 PM<BR> Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] ARIN /
Microsoft press release regarding IP addressTransfers<BR><BR><BR> On
16-Apr-11 02:19, Owen DeLong wrote:<BR><BR> On Apr 15, 2011,
at 9:53 PM, Stephen Sprunk wrote:<BR><BR> On 15-Apr-11
19:00, Matthew Kaufman wrote:<BR><BR> The
adopted policies (if they are using the "relatively new policy" as alluded
to in the release) require the transfer of *a single
aggregate*.<BR><BR><BR> Not quite. NRPM 8.3 only
requires the receiver "demonstrate the need for such resources, as a
single aggregate", not that a single aggregate be
transferred.<BR><BR> ... I do not believe that Stephen's
interpretation below matches the meaning or the intent of the policy as I
understand it. ...<BR><BR> I don't think it does either, for the
record. However, this points out how bad wording has left us in a
situation where we're not sure what the policy text means--much less
whether we agree with it.<BR><BR><BR> I do agree that your
interpretation would be a syntactically and grammatically valid
construction, but, I believe it is contextually nonsensical and not the
intended meaning of the words.<BR><BR><BR> If anyone has a
suggestion for making the actual intent more clear, I am open to
suggestions and would support making an editorial correction for
clarity.<BR><BR> If you can provide examples of transfers you both do
and don't wish to allow, I'll be happy to come up with wording to express
your intent. As it stands, though, I don't understand your (or
anyone else's) intent well enough to
try.<BR><BR> S<BR><BR><BR>--<BR>Stephen Sprunk
"God does not play dice." --Albert Einstein<BR>CCIE #3723
"God is an inveterate gambler, and He throws
the<BR>K5SSS dice at every possible
opportunity." --Stephen
Hawking<BR><BR><BR>------------------------------------------------------------------------------<BR><BR><BR> _______________________________________________<BR> PPML<BR> You
are receiving this message because you are subscribed to<BR> the ARIN
Public Policy Mailing List (<A
href="mailto:ARIN-PPML@arin.net">ARIN-PPML@arin.net</A>).<BR> Unsubscribe
or manage your mailing list subscription at:<BR> <A
href="http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml"
target=_blank>http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml</A><BR> Please
contact <A href="mailto:info@arin.net">info@arin.net</A> if you experience
any issues.<BR>-------------- next part --------------<BR>An HTML
attachment was scrubbed...<BR>URL: <<A
href="http://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20110430/2d387170/attachment.html"
target=_blank>http://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20110430/2d387170/attachment.html</A>><BR><BR>------------------------------<BR><BR>_______________________________________________<BR>ARIN-PPML
mailing list<BR><A
href="mailto:ARIN-PPML@arin.net">ARIN-PPML@arin.net</A><BR><A
href="http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml"
target=_blank>http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml</A><BR><BR>End
of ARIN-PPML Digest, Vol 70, Issue
176<BR>******************************************<BR></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV><BR><BR
clear=all><BR>-- <BR><IMG
src="http://api.ning.com/files/60Dc*7fMSnOD5inYWvnElhieb2y*e2O798iHVa48vgYOJUmz33g1MSmWAGQs0M2C7g4LXqAu0KvJ0c99k3kSouZfig33AnNo/emaillogo.jpg"
width=58 height=61><BR>
<DIV>Rudi Daniel
<DIV><I><A
href="http://www.facebook.com/pages/Kingstown-Saint-Vincent-and-the-Grenadines/DanielCharles/153611257984774"
target=_blank>danielcharles consulting</A><BR></I><B><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: large"><FONT color=#006600><A
href="http://www.facebook.com/pages/Kingstown-Saint-Vincent-and-the-Grenadines/DanielCharles/153611257984774"
target=_blank>1-784 498 8277</A></FONT></SPAN></B></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#006600><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: large"><B><BR></B></SPAN></FONT>
<DIV><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: large"><BR></SPAN></DIV></DIV></DIV><BR></DIV></DIV></DIV>_______________________________________________<BR>PPML<BR>You
are receiving this message because you are subscribed to<BR>the ARIN Public
Policy Mailing List (<A
href="mailto:ARIN-PPML@arin.net">ARIN-PPML@arin.net</A>).<BR>Unsubscribe or
manage your mailing list subscription at:<BR><A
href="http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml">http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml</A><BR>Please
contact info@arin.net if you experience any
issues.</BLOCKQUOTE></DIV><BR></DIV>
<P>
<HR>
<P></P>_______________________________________________<BR>PPML<BR>You are
receiving this message because you are subscribed to<BR>the ARIN Public Policy
Mailing List (ARIN-PPML@arin.net).<BR>Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list
subscription at:<BR>http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml<BR>Please
contact info@arin.net if you experience any issues.</BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>