<!DOCTYPE html>
<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">Hi Eddie,</div>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix"><br>
</div>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 2026/8/3 23:09, Eddie Stauble via
ARIN-PPML wrote:</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:01cc01dd23be$affee960$0ffcbc20$@sum.net">
<pre wrap="" class="moz-quote-pre">As an IPv4 broker, I run into several cases per year where a small company
is based in the US but has a branch office elsewhere in the world. They
have a /24 for BGP here in the US, and want to do the same in the UK. Under
existing policy, they cannot use their need in the UK for justification
since they have less than a /22 in region. So they end up going to RIPE.
They would rather just keep it all in ARIN. This proposal would allow them
to do that.</pre>
</blockquote>
<p>What I am struggling to understand is why this is a problem only
for users of IPv4 brokers and not users of the IPv4 waiting list.
If the same small company wanted to use the ARIN waiting list
instead of purchasing IPv4 space from you, they would run into the
exact same problem.</p>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:01cc01dd23be$affee960$0ffcbc20$@sum.net">
<pre wrap="" class="moz-quote-pre">The waiting list should be used for those who have a need in the ARIN
region.</pre>
</blockquote>
<p>It is not clear to me why this should be the case. In my opinion,
if using space out-of-region is something that ARIN permits, then
it should be permitted for all ARIN members. I don't believe ARIN
membership should be divided into two separate classes: those who
use IPv4 brokers, and those who use the waiting list, with the
former allowed to get space for out-of-region uses and the latter
prohibited from doing so. I don't believe this is good for the
health of the ARIN community.</p>
<p>Furthermore, if ARIN waiting list space is to be reserved for
in-region use exclusively, then section 8.3 transfers becomes a
loophole. One could obtain space under the ARIN waiting list, wait
60 months for the prohibition against transfer under section 4.1.8
to expire, and then transfer the space under section 8.3 to
another ARIN member, who is suddenly allowed to use it
out-of-region. I don't think this creates the right incentives.</p>
<p>Under the current proposal, ARIN would also be forced to track
whether a specific block is permitted to be used out-of-region and
which ones aren't, based on how the member received the space. If
we wish to plug the aforementioned section 8.3 loophole by
allowing the out-of-region ban to carry over after a transfer,
ARIN would be forced to do even more bookkeeping. A question for
ARIN staff is whether this is something they can reasonably do,
and whether it makes sense for ARIN to police this.</p>
<p>In my opinion, draft policy ARIN-2025-3 should either permit
out-of-region use with a single IPv4 /24 in region for everyone,
or be abandoned outright. If the concern is the waiting list being
abused, then I suggest we institute some other requirement that
applies equally to all members, regardless of whether they get
space from section 4.1.8 or section 8.</p>
<p>Best regards,<br>
Quantum</p>
</body>
</html>