> -----Original Message----- > > What's the counter argument against 2014-14? > > Not a counter-argument per se, but just a note that is necessary for the ARIN > AC > to document why any draft policy enables fair and impartial number resource > administration. In the case of 2014-14, this means making clear why a > constraint > is only applied only to transfer requests of a certain size. That may not be > very > difficult, but is a requirement that must be met in recommending any policy > for > adoption. >
But we have been talking about different policies for different types of applicants or different situations since day 1. According to you, ARIN currently makes a reasonable and, in my opinion, efficient and valid distinction between free pool and transfers with respect to team review. We also distinguish between first-time applicants and return applicants and between critical infrastructure and non-critical, if I am not mistaken. I think it benefits everyone concerned if ARIN says with respect to transfers: - a sizeable part of the community thinks we don't need needs assessment on transfers at all - a sizeable part thinks we should have them - needs assessments of transfers cost everyone time and money - by making smaller transfers exempt from costly needs assessments we optimize the balance between efficiency and needs assessment and mitigate if not eliminate most of the objections (speculation, hoarding) to not using needs assessment _______________________________________________ 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.
