Hello John
Thank for your comment.
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.
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.
Best regards
Fernando Frediani
On 30/09/2019 18:56, John Curran wrote:
On 30 Sep 2019, at 4:23 PM, Fernando Frediani <fhfredi...@gmail.com
<mailto:fhfredi...@gmail.com>> wrote:
...
It also says: "/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./"
What's wrong with that statement ? Sounds pretty reasonable to me.
Why do you wish to reduce substantially the roles of the RIRs and
pass them to private companies ?
It also defines Conservation as: "/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./"
Fernando -
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.
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.)
Thanks!
/John
John Curran
President and CEO
American Registry for Internet Numbers
_______________________________________________
ARIN-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:
https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
Please contact i...@arin.net if you experience any issues.
