[address-policy-wg] 2015-01 Draft Document and Impact Analysis Published (Alignment of Transfer Requirements for IPv4 Allocations)

On Wed, May 13, 2015 at 04:02:26PM +0200, Jan Ingvoldstad wrote:
>It was meant as an attack on the argument itself.

No worries. Interpretative difficulties, this proposal seems to
attract them :)

I'll re-state my arguments at this point, for the avoidance of
doubt:

- I recognise that a loop-hole exists and that some people are getting away with something

- I'm *not* trying to defend outright abuse of such loop-holes.

- I don't oppose attempts to prevent outright speculative
  behaviour.

- I don't believe those attempts are going to be terribly
effective, they are going to make speculation somewhat more
expensive, nothing more

- I fear, also in light of what I've seen from the apwg session
today, that these attempts will lead to more bureaucratisation
and attempts of the "community" to regulate into the business
affairs of members and that those will also extend into the ipv6
realm.

- I believe that the freedom of members to determine their own
business affairs is an important good, and one worth balancing
against the desire to not let anyone get away with "gaming the
policy"

- I believe the implementation plan for 2015-01 does not strike
this balance properly and that it sets a dangerous precedent
for more of the same which is already in the pipeline.

rgds,
Sascha Luck