On Aug 26, 2010, at 5:53 PM, Philip Smith wrote:

Owen DeLong said the following on 27/08/10 07:31 :

I will point out that ARIN was willing to agree to all but one provision of
the global policy. From my perspective, ARIN has no desire to meddle
in APNICs affairs, merely a desire not to be forced to hand space off
to APNIC knowing that it could be allocated without a needs basis.

Unfortunately that is meddling in APNIC region affairs. ;-) It was a lot
of hard work to get a transfer policy in place (as we might remember).
If anyone wants to change it, they are very welcome to submit a policy
here to do so.

Nope... You misunderstand my statement.

The provision ARIN opposed in the global policy was the mandatory

unconditional return.

I cannot speak for ARIN, but, I will say personally that I do not believe

ARIN has any desire to affect the APNIC transfer policy in any

particular way. I do believe that ARIN is hesitant to hand returned

space over to APNIC and have it subjected to that transfer policy,

but, that is not meddling in APNIC transfer policy, that is an effort

to not have addresses returned by ARIN unfairly distributed because

one RIR has a radically different basis for their transfer policy than

I agree with the sentiment expressed by several folks yesterday. We (the
community) need to work out a way of making prop-069 (as it was here)
fly in the ARIN region. It was approved in the other 4 RIR regions.

I think that unless we can remove the mandatory unconditional return

provision, that is not likely to happen. Note, ARIN did pass the equivalent

of prop-069 without that provision.

Owen