Hi Bill, Thanks for your update and summary.
My answer is to tick option 1 with answer of NO. As ARIN still has the free pool, there is no need to further discuss this proposal. I would like to suggest to abandon this draft. Regards, Niki On Sat, Apr 19, 2014 at 8:03 PM, Bill Darte <[email protected]> wrote: > The Draft Policy ARIN 2014-2 Improving Anti-Flip Language was discussed at > the ARIN 33 Public Policy Meeting in Chicago last week and while there was > no consensus for the Draft using current language, the community encouraged > the AC to continue work on it as there was sympathy for the problem > statement. https://www.arin.net/policy/proposals/2014_2.html > > Draft Policy Issue: > Simply, the author wishes the Anti-Flip language currently used in the > NRPM to be relaxed, allowing an Inter-RIR transfer within their own > organization of previously existing addresses....though they may have > received a new allocation or assignment within the last 12 months. > > Current draft language states that the organization may do such a > transfer, but may not use the actual addresses which were received from > ARIN (or through transfer) in the previous 12 months. But they could > therefore transfer other resources holdings. > > Request for feedback: > In order to further this discussion and gain a consensus, I would like to > once again ask the community to speak in favor or against this Draft Policy > so that it may be presented and discussed at our next Public Policy > Consultation at NANOG in June. > > 1. Yes or No. Should the community relax existing policy which attempts > to limit the transfer of ARIN resources out of region, in order to allow an > organization flexibility to move address blocks to another portion of their > own organization in another region, even though they might have received > different addresses within ARIN in the last 12 months? > > (Note current policy would still restrict availability of new addresses to > the organization for a period of 12 months after the transfer and is not > being changed by this draft). > > 2. If YES above, are there any other qualifications or limits that should > be imposed on the resources transferred or the organization? > > (Note that a vote of NO to question #1 would essentially ask the Advisory > Council to abandon this draft policy leaving existing policy in place.) > > Thanks to all who continue to work within the community to exercise their > right and duty to craft appropriate policy guiding ARIN's important role in > Internet number resource management. > > Bill Darte > Policy Shepherd for 2014-2 > ARIN Advisory Council > > _______________________________________________ > 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.
