On 17/07/2019 16:40, Job Snijders wrote:
(recognising that this thread is less and less about M&A and more
and more about 2019-04. I apologize for having contributed to a
conflation of the two policy proposals. I hope the AC will
recontextualize these comments)
I hope this is not an attempt to take the AC to disregard the most
comments contrary to IPv6 transfers and only take into account those
manifested in favor in order to pass this proposal. Perhaps I just
misunderstood and AC will take all comments into consideration.
Kind regards
Fernando
On Tue, Jul 16, 2019 at 12:39:54PM -0400, Joe Provo wrote:
> > 1/ Currently the ARIN RPKI TAL is measurably less deployed than any of
> [snip]
>
> I fail to understand bringing this back into it. You were flatly asked
> when the TAL issue is resolved, would this policy still be needed and
> your answer was yes, because of desire [citation
> https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/2019-April/066381.html].
My intention was to bring up as a real example where a RIR's policy
leads to tangible operational issues. In the email you reference, my
observation is that that RIRs evolve over time and may perform
excellent, or perhaps regress. This is the nature of any organization
- staff, board, and zeitgeist all change over time. Heck, even the
legal environment or risk profile can change, forcing a RIR's hand to
make certain choices; this in turn influences the choices operators
may make.
Since a RIR's 'performance' (for lack of better wording) is not fixed
but rather is a variable, I think the concept of a “lock-in” may have
downsides in some scenarios.
> Registry shopping is counter to ICP-2 and I assert a Bad Thing for
the Internet as a whole.
Can I ask you to explain to me in layman’s words how or where ICP-2
suggests choice of RIR (transfers / mobility) explicitly was not a goal?
Even if resource lock-in was an objective, isn't strange that the
implementation of that idea depends on a single emerging technology
(IPv6), where a resource transfer blockage is used as the enforcement
mechanism to prevent "registry shopping"? Do we accept as an extreme
outcome that ARIN maybe one day mostly is an IPv6 resource registry
(meaning the other types of Number Resources are managed elsewhere)?
Kind regards,
Job
_______________________________________________
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:
https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
Please contact i...@arin.net if you experience any issues.
_______________________________________________
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:
https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
Please contact i...@arin.net if you experience any issues.