Opposed due to many different reasons mentioned previously in this list.
On Tue, Jun 25, 2013 at 12:18 PM, Scott Leibrand <[email protected]>wrote: > A majority is >50%. Many multinationals don't have >50% of their users in > any one region, so would be unable to get addresses anywhere if this policy > were adopted in all five regions. > > If you want the test to be "more than in any other region", that would be > a plurality, not a majority. > > I am opposed to this draft policy as written. > > Scott > > On Jun 25, 2013, at 10:03 AM, David Huberman <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > Hello - > > > > I fully support this proposal text. > > > > Quote: > > > > "Any entity (individual or organization) requesting ARIN issued IP > blocks must provide ARIN with proof of an established legal presence in the > designated ARIN region, and have a majority of their technical > infrastructure and customers in the designated ARIN region. This > requirement applies to both IPv4 and IPv6 address space." > > > > The internet engineering community purposely designed the RIR system to > be regional. Different regions have different needs, and grow at different > rates. Current NRPM text is deficient in the arena of defining who can, and > cannot, request number resources from the Registry. Importantly, staff > have (on multiple occasions) presented the ARIN community with the > challenge of dealing with requestors who are trying to "game" the RIR > system by obtaining space from ARIN when the customers are primarily (and > even exclusively) outside the ARIN region. The proposed policy text neatly > offers staff a good tool to overcome those challenges. > > > > The proposed policy text is elegant and operational for a few reasons: > > > > 1) If a majority of an organization's customers is outside the ARIN > region, there organization should be subject to the RIR in which their > majority resides. If that majority is in APAC or EMEA, and those regions > are out of space, that challenge is out-of-scope of ARIN policy. (It is the > purview of that region's registry and its policy making community.) > > > > 2) It does not impede on the ability of global backbone operators to > request space from ARIN, so long as the ARIN region is the largest consumer > of devices and addresses. > > > > 3) The use of the term "majority" presents no functional challenges to > either requestors or staff. Merriam-Webster has a definition of the word > majority stating, "the greater quantity or share". > > > > I have only one recommended edit to the text. I recommend replacing "IP > blocks" with "number resources", so that the text precisely captures the > activities of the Registry. > > > > Yours, > > David Huberman > > _______________________________________________ > > 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. > _______________________________________________ > 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. >
_______________________________________________ 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.
