[address-policy-wg] Re: [ppml] Just say *NO* to PI space -- or how to make it less destructive

> > As has been discussed at ARIN, this is a good way to get the 
government to
> > declare the RIR a monopoly engaging in anticompetitive behavior.  I 
for
> > one don't want that.
> 
> I don't think that follows, but unless ARIN legal counsel or someone 
> who is a real lawyer has made a statement here, I'm not sure how 
> seriously to take this.  Pointer to such official legal counsel would 
> be appreciated.

Those of us who have lived and worked in North America or the
UK, have a general understanding of this because restraint of
trade doctrine is a part of English common law which was then
inherited by other countries such as Canada and the USA. 
However, European competition law is not based on the same
principles and in the UK today, there are often conflicts
between the doctrine of restraint of trade and European 
competition law. If you are interested in understanding this
then start here
http://nys-stlc.syr.edu/lawlibrary/antitrust/antitrustbasics.aspx
The important bit is the RULE OF REASON towards the bottom.
If your English is advanced enough, then you could try reading
legislation such as the Sherman Act, but you may find that
lawyers like to use common words in uncommon ways.

This illustrates the wisdom of the industry driven bottom-up
policy development process that results in ARIN developing 
IP address policy in North America and RIPE doing the same
job in Europe. There are different norms of society and of law
in these different places. The people of North America would
probably view your position as a SOCIALIST one and see that
as a very negative thing. However, in Europe, people will tend
to see your position as a SOCIALIST one and see that as a good
thing.

Because you are crossposting this thread to a global V6 list 
and to a RIPE mailing list, it seems to me that you feel there
should be a single unitary global policy. However, that is contrary
to the structure of the RIR system, contrary to NRO policy and
contrary to the outcome of last autumns WSIS meetings. Policy
proposal 2005-1 is an ARIN proposal that has worked its way 
through the ARIN policy process. We discussed it intensely at
the recent ARIN meeting in Montreal and it was broadly accepted
by the participants at that meeting. It is highly likely that
it will become part of ARIN policy and ARIN *WILL* be issuing
PI IPv6 blocks by the end of the year.

You are welcome to register your disapproval, however so many
people have worked to develop this reasonable compromise that
I don't think you will be able to sway any of them.

> RIRs run on non-profit principle, but nothing precludes them from 
> increasing the expenses, e.g., for donations to make the internet a 
> better place, setting a foundation for multihoming research to 
> actually SOLVE this problem, etc.etc.

I'm not sure if research is within ARIN's scope, however even if
it is, we cannot delay deployment of IPv6 merely because there 
is still a need for research. Throughout the deployment of IPv4
and the astronomical growth of the Internet, both research and
commercial deployment happened simultaneously and the results
brought major benefits to society, even if it did mean a lot of
struggle with imperfections.

> I wouldn't object to reserving a /44 just in case, but make no 
> provisions (at this point) for applying more.  If someone needs more 
> than /48, it needs to justify another one, and get a separate /48 
> (with its own reserved /44).

I think you misunderstand ARIN's allocation algorithm here. The purpose
of a reserved block is to allow an applicant to receive an increased
allocation from the reserved block in order to be able to aggregate
the new and old allocations. If the recipient of a /48 allocation 
applies for more and receieves the rest of their reserved /44 then
they can announce a single /44 prefix instead of two /48 prefixes (or 
more).
This minimizes the impact on the global routing table. The ARIN IPv4 
allocation algorithm works the same way.

--Michael Dillon