<<<"I've attended ARIN, RIPE, and LACNIC in the last few weeks and I think that there is significant support for the idea of trying to craft a global policy on inter-RIR transfers.">>>
I would support the crafting of such a policy for IPv4. I don't hear the requirement for IPv6. But what would it mean down line if there were no such global policy? RD On May 28, 2015 12:00 PM, <arin-ppml-requ...@arin.net> wrote: > Send ARIN-PPML mailing list submissions to > arin-ppml@arin.net > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > arin-ppml-requ...@arin.net > > You can reach the person managing the list at > arin-ppml-ow...@arin.net > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than "Re: Contents of ARIN-PPML digest..." > > > Today's Topics: > > 1. Re: Draft Policy ARIN-2015-2: Modify 8.4 (Inter-RIR Transfers > to Specified Recipients) (John Curran) > 2. Re: Draft Policy ARIN-2015-2: Modify 8.4 (Inter-RIR > Transfers > to Specified Recipients) (David Huberman) > 3. Re: Draft Policy ARIN-2015-2: Modify 8.4 (Inter-RIR Transfers > to Specified Recipients) (Owen DeLong) > 4. Re: Draft Policy ARIN-2015-2: Modify 8.4 (Inter-RIR Transfers > to Specified Recipients) (Jason Schiller) > 5. Re: Draft Policy ARIN-2015-2: Modify 8.4 (Inter-RIR Transfers > to Specified Recipients) (John Santos) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Thu, 28 May 2015 11:49:29 +0000 > From: John Curran <jcur...@arin.net> > To: Owen DeLong <o...@delong.com> > Cc: "arin-ppml@arin.net" <arin-ppml@arin.net> > Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Draft Policy ARIN-2015-2: Modify 8.4 > (Inter-RIR Transfers to Specified Recipients) > Message-ID: <6fdfdcbb-7019-4a42-9a62-ca4bbabce...@corp.arin.net> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > > On May 27, 2015, at 11:39 PM, Owen DeLong <o...@delong.com> wrote: > > > > My suggestion is that I don't mind (virtually) unrestricted moves of > addresses to different regions staying with the same organization. However, > if we are to allow that, I want us to find a way that you can't merely use > that as a way to move addresses out of flip protection to then flip them to > another organization via an RIR with a less restrictive transfer policy. > > > > So... If you transfer addresses to another region, keeping them in the > same organization, no penalty. However, you are not allowed to subsequently > transfer them (or other addresses in that region) to an external party for > at least 12 months. > > That second portion that you seek would affect the ongoing operation of > another RIR, i.e. it requires them having some explicit policy to that > effect. > > To obtain the result you seek, we either need globally coordinated transfer > policy in this area, or you need to make the inter-RIR transfer policy > explicit > in this regard in determination of compatibility. > > /John > > John Curran > President and CEO > ARIN > > > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 2 > Date: Thu, 28 May 2015 11:58:52 +0000 > From: David Huberman <david.huber...@microsoft.com> > To: John Curran <jcur...@arin.net>, Owen DeLong <o...@delong.com> > Cc: "arin-ppml@arin.net" <arin-ppml@arin.net> > Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Draft Policy ARIN-2015-2: Modify 8.4 > (Inter-RIR Transfers to Specified Recipients) > Message-ID: > < > dm2pr03mb39841219cdc3fc02405b6949b...@dm2pr03mb398.namprd03.prod.outlook.com > > > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > > I've attended ARIN, RIPE, and LACNIC in the last few weeks and I think > that there is significant support for the idea of trying to craft a global > policy on inter-RIR transfers. > > > ________________________________________ > From: arin-ppml-boun...@arin.net <arin-ppml-boun...@arin.net> on behalf > of John Curran <jcur...@arin.net> > Sent: Thursday, May 28, 2015 4:49:29 AM > To: Owen DeLong > Cc: arin-ppml@arin.net > Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Draft Policy ARIN-2015-2: Modify 8.4 > (Inter-RIR Transfers to Specified Recipients) > > On May 27, 2015, at 11:39 PM, Owen DeLong <o...@delong.com> wrote: > > > > My suggestion is that I don't mind (virtually) unrestricted moves of > addresses to different regions staying with the same organization. However, > if we are to allow that, I want us to find a way that you can't merely use > that as a way to move addresses out of flip protection to then flip them to > another organization via an RIR with a less restrictive transfer policy. > > > > So... If you transfer addresses to another region, keeping them in the > same organization, no penalty. However, you are not allowed to subsequently > transfer them (or other addresses in that region) to an external party for > at least 12 months. > > That second portion that you seek would affect the ongoing operation of > another RIR, i.e. it requires them having some explicit policy to that > effect. > > To obtain the result you seek, we either need globally coordinated transfer > policy in this area, or you need to make the inter-RIR transfer policy > explicit > in this regard in determination of compatibility. > > /John > > John Curran > President and CEO > ARIN > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > PPML > You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to > the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML@arin.net). > Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: > http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml > Please contact i...@arin.net if you experience any issues. > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 3 > Date: Thu, 28 May 2015 14:27:22 +0200 > From: Owen DeLong <o...@delong.com> > To: John Curran <jcur...@arin.net> > Cc: "arin-ppml@arin.net" <arin-ppml@arin.net> > Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Draft Policy ARIN-2015-2: Modify 8.4 > (Inter-RIR Transfers to Specified Recipients) > Message-ID: <4023727f-ef91-4bed-a2ec-e00cfa557...@delong.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii > > Or simply not permit it under ARIN policy until such exists. > > Owen > > > On May 28, 2015, at 1:49 PM, John Curran <jcur...@arin.net> wrote: > > > > On May 27, 2015, at 11:39 PM, Owen DeLong <o...@delong.com> wrote: > >> > >> My suggestion is that I don't mind (virtually) unrestricted moves of > addresses to different regions staying with the same organization. However, > if we are to allow that, I want us to find a way that you can't merely use > that as a way to move addresses out of flip protection to then flip them to > another organization via an RIR with a less restrictive transfer policy. > >> > >> So... If you transfer addresses to another region, keeping them in the > same organization, no penalty. However, you are not allowed to subsequently > transfer them (or other addresses in that region) to an external party for > at least 12 months. > > > > That second portion that you seek would affect the ongoing operation of > > another RIR, i.e. it requires them having some explicit policy to that > effect. > > > > To obtain the result you seek, we either need globally coordinated > transfer > > policy in this area, or you need to make the inter-RIR transfer policy > explicit > > in this regard in determination of compatibility. > > > > /John > > > > John Curran > > President and CEO > > ARIN > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 4 > Date: Thu, 28 May 2015 09:46:55 -0400 > From: Jason Schiller <jschil...@google.com> > To: Owen DeLong <o...@delong.com> > Cc: arin-ppml@arin.net > Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Draft Policy ARIN-2015-2: Modify 8.4 > (Inter-RIR Transfers to Specified Recipients) > Message-ID: > < > cac4yj2vywuzeqjfkozc7zy1o3txvk7jwnk1h95a28kt6xyj...@mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > > Owen, > > How does that differ from the policy text I sent? > > Can you send an idea of policy text? > > I thought the text I sent said that an ARIN org can transfer IPs out to > another wholely owned subsidiary in another RIR region if they have been > the recipient of transfer in less that 12 months IF the recipient org will > be required (read by recipient's RIR policy) to hold the transfered > resource for the balance of the 12 months. > > ___Jason > On May 28, 2015 8:31 AM, "Owen DeLong" <o...@delong.com> wrote: > > > Or simply not permit it under ARIN policy until such exists. > > > > Owen > > > > > On May 28, 2015, at 1:49 PM, John Curran <jcur...@arin.net> wrote: > > > > > > On May 27, 2015, at 11:39 PM, Owen DeLong <o...@delong.com> wrote: > > >> > > >> My suggestion is that I don't mind (virtually) unrestricted moves of > > addresses to different regions staying with the same organization. > However, > > if we are to allow that, I want us to find a way that you can't merely > use > > that as a way to move addresses out of flip protection to then flip them > to > > another organization via an RIR with a less restrictive transfer policy. > > >> > > >> So... If you transfer addresses to another region, keeping them in the > > same organization, no penalty. However, you are not allowed to > subsequently > > transfer them (or other addresses in that region) to an external party > for > > at least 12 months. > > > > > > That second portion that you seek would affect the ongoing operation of > > > another RIR, i.e. it requires them having some explicit policy to that > > effect. > > > > > > To obtain the result you seek, we either need globally coordinated > > transfer > > > policy in this area, or you need to make the inter-RIR transfer policy > > explicit > > > in this regard in determination of compatibility. > > > > > > /John > > > > > > John Curran > > > President and CEO > > > ARIN > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: < > http://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20150528/ec1fba87/attachment-0001.html > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 5 > Date: Thu, 28 May 2015 11:26:23 -0400 > From: John Santos <j...@egh.com> > To: "arin-ppml@arin.net" <arin-ppml@arin.net> > Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Draft Policy ARIN-2015-2: Modify 8.4 > (Inter-RIR Transfers to Specified Recipients) > Message-ID: <1150528104822.28183b-100...@joonya.egh.com> > Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII > > On Thu, 28 May 2015, John Curran wrote: > > > On May 27, 2015, at 11:39 PM, Owen DeLong <o...@delong.com> wrote: > > > > > > My suggestion is that I don't mind (virtually) unrestricted moves of > addresses to different regions staying with the same organization. However, > if we are to allow that, I want us to find a way that you can't merely use > that as a way to move addresses o > > ut of flip protection to then flip them to another organization via an > RIR with a less restrictive transfer policy. > > > > > > So... If you transfer addresses to another region, keeping them in the > same organization, no penalty. However, you are not allowed to subsequently > transfer them (or other addresses in that region) to an external party for > at least 12 months. > > > > That second portion that you seek would affect the ongoing operation of > > another RIR, i.e. it requires them having some explicit policy to that > effect. > > > > To obtain the result you seek, we either need globally coordinated > transfer > > policy in this area, or you need to make the inter-RIR transfer policy > explicit > > in this regard in determination of compatibility. > > If the penalty were that if you transfered out of your organization those > addresses in less than 12 months, you could not receive new addresses > (either from free pool or as the result of a directed transfer) UNDER ARIN > until the 12 months were up, there would be no requirement of any change > to any other RIR's rules nor any requirement of coordination with other > RIRs. > > This could be handled under needs assessment. When a recipient comes to > ARIN saying they need X addresses and currently have less than Y% > available from our current total of Z addresses, ARIN would count > addresses transfered out within the last 12 months as still being > included in Z. Addresses transfered to another RIR and then out of > the org would prevent the recipient from returning to the well > repeatedly. But an org that messed up its planning once, got too > many addresses and then decided to sell them would be okay. > > If they messed up twice (announce need in January and acquire addresses, > decide in Feb that they don't really need them any more due to changed > business plans or conditions and sell them, then turn around again in > March to get more addresses) they would either be utterly incompetent, > having screwed up their planning 3 times in a year, or they would be > trying to game the system and their business plan is to flip addresses, > not to provide an Internet service. > > > > -- > John Santos > Evans Griffiths & Hart, Inc. > 781-861-0670 ext 539 > > > > ------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > ARIN-PPML mailing list > ARIN-PPML@arin.net > http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml > > End of ARIN-PPML Digest, Vol 119, Issue 18 > ****************************************** >
_______________________________________________ PPML You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML@arin.net). Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml Please contact i...@arin.net if you experience any issues.