[address-policy-wg] 2013-03 New Draft Document and Impact Analysis Published (No Need - Post-Depletion Reality Adjustment and Clean up)

On Sun, Aug 04, 2013 at 12:52:13PM -0500, David Farmer wrote:
> On 8/4/13 12:15 , Jan Ingvoldstad wrote:
> >On Sun, Aug 4, 2013 at 6:48 PM, David Farmer <farmer at umn.edu
> ><mailto:farmer at umn.edu>> wrote:
> >
> >    I'm not introducing anything new, I'm objecting to the removal of
> >    something that has always been there, as are others.
> >
> >
> >As I understand it, there has "always" been a requirement for need. I
> >don't disagree that this is nothing new.
> >
> >However, you used the phrase "verified operational need", which is
> >something different.
> >
> >I am a n00b in the RIPE community, so I have certainly not read
> >everything there is, but from what I have seen, read and understand,
> >this verification thing is new.
> 
> If you wanted more than the minimum it was always necessary to provide a 
> story that passed a smell test.  Also, if you wanted another batch of 
> numbers you always had to explain what did with the old ones you were 
> given, usually providing some data, much of the "bureaucracy" 2013-3 
> wants to eliminate.
> 
> Verified: 1. Make sure or demonstrate that (something) is true, 
> accurate, or justified. 2. Swear to or support (a statement) by affidavit.
> 
> Justified: 1. Having, done for, or marked by a good or legitimate 
> reason. 2. Declared or made righteous in the sight of God.
> 
> So, please tell me how "verified operational need" is that different. 
> If you would prefer justified or validated operational need.  OK, what ever.
> 

	persuant to your comments and David Conrads contribution,
	I'd suggest that the "smell test" criteria has changed 
	dramatically over the years.  Nearly all the IPv4 space I have
	requested has passed the "verified operational need" using the
	Warren Buffet test.  (he's a man of good character)  These days
	it sometimes goes as far as explaining a business model, showing
	signed contracts, bank statements,  customer lists and credit reports on clients.

	There is a argument to be made that RIRs have gone too far into 
	delving into a request... boardering on harrassment and restraint
	of trade.  Not saying that the Buffet test alone is good either.
	
/bill