[146375] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: ARIN-2011-1: ARIN Inter-RIR Transfers - Last Call (expires in one
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (CJ Aronson)
Thu Nov 10 08:39:19 2011
In-Reply-To: <m2ty6cp0ml.wl%randy@psg.com>
Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2011 06:38:16 -0700
From: CJ Aronson <cja@daydream.com>
To: Randy Bush <randy@psg.com>
Cc: NANOG list <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
So Randy.. Are you in favor or opposed to 2011-1?
Thanks!
----Cathy
On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 6:28 AM, Randy Bush <randy@psg.com> wrote:
> >> no need to coordinate rules/policies at all. what we suggested in a/p
> >> three years back was simple. seller must abide by seller's local
> >> selling policy and buyer must abide by buyer's local receiving policy.
> >
> > Such a process creates a back-door requirement that participating
> > registries race to the bottom eliminating eligibility requirements for
> > address recipients. Failure to do so leaves their own registrants at
> > an unfair disadvantage when trying to get addresses.
>
> i am sure the americans who think all address space should righfully be
> theirs can dream up paranoid scenarios for anything. but dear canute,
> the tide is coming, get over it or get wet.
>
> they do not sell enough enough anti-nausea meds here for me to read the
> arin ppml list.
>
> randy
>
>
