...SNIP...
1) Do you support the principle of efficient utilization based on need (Conservation/Sustainability)?
I think it is important to differentiate between the the free pool and the transfer pool when we answer this question. I believe in the principle of utilization based on need for distribution from the free pool only, as that was a viable solution to the need to distribute a valuable but un-priced asset. I do not believe that a needs test should be a principle for transfers, as these assets are priced. Further I believe that a policy which recognizes both pools' existence will limit access to the free pool for those who transfer away their addresses.
2) Do you support the principle of hierarchical aggregation (Routability)?
No, I can see a day when network operators decide that aggregation is less important than some other incentive, and I say leave it to them.
3) Do you support the principle of uniqueness (Registration)?
Yes. Our primary responsibility per RFC-2050, and one which should not be "balanced" with other principles such that primary responsibility is impaired.
4) Do you support the goal of balancing these principles with each other under the overarching principle of Stewardship?
What is the overarching principle of Stewardship? To me that principle must include the recognition that the Steward is not King, and should not be imposing new rules where not absolutely required. The Steward's job is not to expand the kingdom or institute reforms, but to care for and maintain, with the lightest touch, the objects of his stewardship. RFC-2050 did include language about needs tests for allocations from the free pool, and for transfers, but was written in a time where a transfer market of priced IP addresses was not contemplated. If the authors of RFC-2050 did not include a needs test for transfers of unpriced assets, they would have left a hole which would have allowed the free pool to be liquidated through repeated transfers through an entity that got from the free pool, transferred away to someone without need, and returned for more free pool addresses. So the principle of conservation through needs testing was a requirement for both allocations from the free pool and transfers only as long as a priced transfer market did not exist. Markets are historically the way humans allocate scarce resources efficiently. Now that we have that market doing our conservation for us, the overarching principle of Stewardship in my mind is to recognize our prime responsibility of Registration, and not to vitiate the reliability of Whois by driving transactions underground through the maintaining a "principle" of conservation designed with only the free pool in mind.
Regards, Mike Burns _______________________________________________ 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.
