Hi Owen,
"Needs testing is not merely a vehicle to save the remaining free pool. If
that were true, then we would not have subjected the transfer policies to
needs testing."
Prior to the 12 month waiting period for transfers which was implemented in
2012, needs testing was *indeed* required to save the remaining free pool.
Otherwise applicants would receive an allocation, sell it to re-establish
their need, and get another allocation. No bogus ORGs needed. Even before
addresses could be openly sold, needs testing of transfers was required to
avoid the draining of the free pool through needs-based allocations, then
transfers to a non-needing party, rinse and repeat. This is why I believe
needs testing was applied to transfers in RFC2050, not due to any principle
which required registry stewards to arbitrate transfers in the absence of a
free pool and the presence of a natural conserving factor- price.
I am opposed to 2014-18. Now that the minimums have dropped to /24, one of
the barriers to very small applicants has been removed. Although I am
against need-testing of transfers, I am in favor of continued needs-testing
free pool allocations, even the lowly /24s.
Regards,
Mike Burns
_______________________________________________
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.
