On 12/20/14, 7:29 AM, Mike Burns wrote:
Hi Seth,

Thank you for the feedback.
That is more along the lines of APNIC and RIPE exhaust policy, which
allows a one-time allocation from their remaining pools. I think there
are good arguments for that, but I don't see why a one-time limit is
similarly required for needs-free transfers of addresses already gone
from the free pool.

Do you think the one-time limit will provide some protection against
abuse that would make 2014-14 more palatable to you than the once-per
year limit?

Can you describe the abuse that might result from the once-per-year
option that would be precluded by the once-per-lifetime method?


I don't think abuse is a major concern. There will always be some abuse and the NRPM doesn't need to become a 500 page thing of conditions.

I have to admit I'm not familiar with RIPE policy. The "one and done" thought is basically a compromise between people that outright oppose any transfers without a needs assessment. But the thing is it's been happening anyway: companies are contracting use of IP space and are either waiting either for an NRPM change to update whois or just using it without being able to update whois.

Since this is already happening (whether or not the community as a whole accepts it) 2014-14 will have the advantage of allowing whois to become more accurate.

I do agree that needs assessments on resources long gone from the free pool approaches pointless.

I also think that all of the restrictive rules are what brought us to this point, I don't see how making more restrictions will help. At this stage those rules should be relaxed. Fortunately some of them have been like lowering the minimum to /24 and removing the multihoming requirement, for example.


2014-14 is still a topic for discussion, and my understanding is that it
could be modified, so if there is a change that would elicit your
support, it's good that the shepherds know that.


I support 2014-14 as written.

~Seth
_______________________________________________
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.

Reply via email to