Hi Paul,
Principles should apply always, in every condition, so I cringe at your use
of the term "current guiding principles" whose adjectives seem to vitiate
the strength of the word.
The "goal" of conservation dictated a practice of needs based allocation in
the condition of free pool availability and no transfer market.
This practice had to include transfers, or goal of conservation would be
thwarted by bad actors getting from the free pool for need, transferring to
someone without need, then going back to the free pool for more, and
repeating.
Now, however, the requirement of conservation is met by the transfer market
of priced addresses, and the free pool availability will disappear soon.
Needs testing transfers just adds another layer of conservation over the
natural conservation provided by the price of the addresses.
Since some (a few?, many?,RIPE?,APNIC?) consider that there is no
requirement for RIRs to be needs-testing transfers, it is impossible for us
to accept the needs-based allocation policy as a principle, given my
understanding of what a principle is, anyway.
From my perspective, the RFC-2050 revival/insertion into policy has run into
significant enough opposition already for the shepherds to reconsider the
whole adventure, or at least start only with inclusion of the principle of
registration, which seems to have no opposition.
Regards,
Mike
-----Original Message-----
From: Paul Vixie
Sent: Thursday, June 13, 2013 3:18 AM
To: William Herrin
Cc: arin-ppml@arin.net
Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] ARIN-2013-4: RIR Principles / Request for
GeneralThoughts
William Herrin wrote:
...
That having been said, this is 2013 not 1996. Justified need and free
market are opposite sides of a partisan divide. Your draft takes a
position.
from where i sit, jason's draft takes ARIN's position, both current and
prior.
Something in such major contention can't possibly be a *current*
guiding principle. Think about it. Partisan divide and guiding
principle are on opposite ends of the spectrum.
i disagree that current guiding principles are by definition noncontentious.
if you would like to test the waters regarding a change to ARIN's
guiding principle in the future, there's a policy process available to you.
but hijacking a relatively tame proposal which would merely keep the
status quo, because here and now is a convenient place and time to
advance your own cause, is unprofessional.
paul
_______________________________________________
PPML
You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML@arin.net).
Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
Please contact i...@arin.net if you experience any issues.
_______________________________________________
PPML
You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML@arin.net).
Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
Please contact i...@arin.net if you experience any issues.
