On 6/7/2013 4:16 PM, Chris Grundemann wrote:
Hello all,
Hello.
...
1) Do you support the principle of efficient utilization based on need
(Conservation/Sustainability)?
No. Certainly not anywhere near as how it is currently implemented.
Efficient utilization based on need makes no sense when enforced against
a transfer market... it simply interferes with legitimate business
transactions (e.g., buying enough address space to launch and run a
service for the foreseeable lifetime of IPv4)
Efficient utilization based on need makes no sense for IPv6, as the
address space is huge *and* at this time we should be strongly
encouraging the adoption, not making ISPs do stupid things to try to
reduce the fees they are paying (for instance).
And the current needs-based allocation of IPv4 is simply delaying the
inevitable runout of IPv4 as the need window is shrunk and the scrutiny
increased, never mind the several-times-a-year adjustments in policy
which make planning for runout all that much more impossible.
2) Do you support the principle of hierarchical aggregation (Routability)?
I think that it would be great if we could have an easily-routed
Internet addressing system. Unfortunately this isn't what happened with
IPv4 and isn't what will happen with IPv6. The fact that the need for PI
address space on IPv6 is at least as great as that need on IPv4 means
that we will never get good aggregation. Given that, attempts by the
registrar to influence this are likely to have counter-intuitive and
counterproductive effects.
So, no.
3) Do you support the principle of uniqueness (Registration)?
Yes, absolutely. That is the one (and only) thing the registrar should
be doing. See land title registration.
Spending money on travel to go meet with lots of other organizations to
discuss policy? No. Holding big conferences? No. Putting together
education campaigns? No. Making sure that when the database says I have
the right to use some address space, nobody else thinks they have that
same right? Definitely yes.
4) Do you support the goal of balancing these principles with each
other under the overarching principle of Stewardship?
Assuming that by "balancing" you mean "laser focus on the primary
mission of ensuring uniqueness and accurate registration" sure, but I
think that's not what you mean, so no.
Matthew Kaufman
_______________________________________________
PPML
You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List ([email protected]).
Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
Please contact [email protected] if you experience any issues.
