<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=Windows-1252">
</head>
<body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;">
On Feb 23, 2014, at 3:38 PM, Steven Ryerse <<a href="mailto:SRyerse@eclipse-networks.com">SRyerse@eclipse-networks.com</a>> wrote:<br>
<div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline">
<blockquote type="cite">
<div lang="EN-US" link="blue" vlink="purple" style="font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 13px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px;">
<div class="WordSection1" style="page: WordSection1;">
<div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;">
<span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; color: rgb(31, 73, 125);">This is an example of how policies penalize legitimate organizations needing to do legitimate transfers. In my opinion the Polices have swung so far towards preventing
abuse they impact legitimate transfers. In the publicly traded company world, each quarter is like a year and a year is like 4 years to them since they have to publish their quarterly results 4 times a year. For them a year is an eternity. Also, the Internet
itself has allowed business functions that once took months or years to take days or weeks which is todays reality. Some of y’all think 12 months or even 18 months is a short time but that doesn’t align with the reality of today’s business world that the
Internet has helped foster. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;">
<span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; color: rgb(31, 73, 125);"> </span></div>
<div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;">
<span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; color: rgb(31, 73, 125);">Although I don’t like abuse either, I am definitely AGAINST raising the hold period to be longer than a year. If it has to be a year then at minimum, there should be
a procedure defined in the policy that an organization can appeal to the ARIN CFO (or whoever) to get an exception for a shorter timeframe – even as short as 30 days. If what the organization is doing is legitimate and the ARIN CFO will approve it, then the
12 month hold rule should be waived. My 2 cents. </span></div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
</div>
<div>Steve - </div>
<div> </div>
<div> Just to ask a question - if the hold time was fairly short (e.g. 1 year), would it really be necessary</div>
<div> to have an exception process? To the extent possible, it would be nice to keep processes (ergo, </div>
<div> policy that drives processes) as simple as possible, as this both helps with automation as well as </div>
<div> predicability for registry users. </div>
<div> </div>
<div> While there is already an ARIN appeals process, it is for the situation when it appears that ARIN did </div>
<div> not follow adopted policy in handling a resource request, as opposed to an appeal for a particular </div>
<div> ARIN officer to reexamine and exercise their own judgement (which is what I understand from your</div>
<div> proposal above.) There are some implications to your proposed appeal option (potential for variation, </div>
<div> fraud) which would need to be carefully considered carefully before implementation.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>FYI,</div>
<div>/John</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>John Curran</div>
<div>President and CEO</div>
<div>ARIN</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
</body>
</html>