<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;
charset=windows-1252">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<p>Hello John</p>
<p>Thank for your comment.<br>
You are right that 2050 has been obsoleted by 7020, however 7020
is much shorter and doesn't contain much of the points and basis
of 2050. That doesn't necessarily mean that 7020 invalidated
everything that was not repeated 'ipsis literis' as it was in
2050. An example of that are the two statements below which keep
being very actual and applied in practice in multiple RIRs still
now a days.</p>
<p>We as a community of policy builders must base our discussions on
something that makes sense to each Internet number registry system
and those type of statements and principles (some of them never
get old), although not repeated in 7020 are still very valid and
actual to the present days.</p>
<p>Best regards<br>
Fernando Frediani<br>
</p>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 30/09/2019 18:56, John Curran wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:BF80B9E6-C152-4C67-84EE-7E86B403350B@arin.net">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;
charset=windows-1252">
On 30 Sep 2019, at 4:23 PM, Fernando Frediani <<a
href="mailto:fhfrediani@gmail.com" class=""
moz-do-not-send="true">fhfrediani@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br
class="">
<div>
<blockquote type="cite" class="">...<br
class="Apple-interchange-newline">
<div class="">
<div text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF" class="">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">It also says: "<i class="">ISPs
are required to utilize address space in an efficient
manner. To this end, ISPs should have documented
justification available for each assignment. The
regional registry may, at any time, ask for this
information. If the information is not available,
future allocations may be impacted.In extreme cases,
existing loans may be impacted.</i>"</div>
<p class="">What's wrong with that statement ? Sounds
pretty reasonable to me.<br class="">
Why do you wish to reduce substantially the roles of the
RIRs and pass them to private companies ?</p>
<p class="">It also defines Conservation as: "<i class="">Fair
distribution of globally unique Internet address space
according to the operational needs of the end-users
and Internet Service Providers operating networks
using this address space. Prevention of stockpiling in
order to maximize the lifetime of the Internet address
space.</i>"</p>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div class="">
<div text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF" class="">
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">Fernando - </div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">Just as a reminder - it is ultimately up to
the Internet number community in each region to determine
the appropriate policies for administration of the RIR in
that region.</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">There is nothing wrong with citing RFCs
statements with number policy that you like, but it is
worth noting that such statements do not constrain the
ARIN community from making policy of a different intent,
as it is ultimately up to this community to decide on what
makes for appropriate policy in the ARIN region. (Note
also that RFC 2050 has been obsoleted by RFC 7020, which
contains a more current description of the Internet number
registry system.) </div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">Thanks!</div>
<div class="">/John</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">
<div class="">John Curran</div>
<div class="">President and CEO</div>
<div class="">American Registry for Internet Numbers</div>
</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>