Hi Dean, On 05/06/14 01:01, Dean Pemberton wrote:
I think I still hear this as "DN would not apply if the transfer was within APNIC, but would apply if it was to/from ARIN" To my mind this creates complexity/ambiguity which isn't required. We either think DN is important, or we don't.
if the policy world would be so simple... :-) As long as ARIN requires DN, transfers from ARIN will require DN.The RIPE Community has already made the first steps and removed the DN requirement. APNIC has already had that in the past and introduced DN only because it wanted transfers from ARIN to come in. As long as the ARIN community has a few very vocal people against removing DN, I do not see them moving forward in that direction. Not as long as ARIN still has addresses to allocate and those people continue to voice their opinion against the removal of DN from ARIN policy.
I understand what you are saying. That we should either make it white or black and not allow any grey areas into policy. However, I am hoping that we can build a policy proposal and (eventually) a policy without DN and at the same time allow those in the community that want to transfer addresses from/to ARIN to have a method to transfer those resources - ask APNIC staff to come up with a process to allow those transfers to still happen.
What I am suggesting is that if ARIN continues to require DN and nobody else does, we can not just say that the APNIC community has to chose between RIPE and ARIN. We should be working to get a policy that requires DN only from/to those that still require it by policy (in this case, only for transfers coming in from ARIN).
Once we do that, I am sure that we will see: 1. more transfers between APNIC and RIPE2. that ARIN will start following what the rest of the world does and will remove (even if just for a /16 per year) the DN from their policy.
If we do not remove DN from APNIC policy, I think we will see more and more companies becoming a member (LIR) of the RIPE NCC and getting as many IP addresses as they want. It only costs EUR2000 for the sign-up fee and an other EUR1600 per year (it's even cheaper than APNIC membership and transfers are free of charge). You get as many addresses as you want, on your name and you do not have to show any DN.
The transfer market has removed the borders between the RIRs, the communities should work together to setup policies that allow (for as long as IPv4 will still be used) transfers without any borders. If we do not do it sooner than later, whois will suffer as companies that afford paying for the resources will get them if they really need them (even if these IP addresses will be registered to companies that can not formerly register the transfer in whois).
cheers, elvis
On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 10:20 AM, Elvis Velea <elvis at velea dot eu> wrote:Hi Dean, I think I did not make my idea clear enough. I don't want to cause policy fragmentation. What I wanted to say is that we would remove DN completely and APNIC staff would (just as RIPE NCC staff if 2014-05 becomes policy) create an operational procedure and work with the rest of the the RIRs that have Inter-RIR transfer policy to allow Inter-RIR transfers to and from the region. Basically, this would mean that if a region still has DN in their policy, APNIC will have a procedure to verify DN for it's member for transfers coming in the region and facilitate the transfer. To quote from RIPE-2014-05: " If another RIR has a different policy, the RIPE NCC should create an operational procedure, in cooperation with that RIR, to allow transfers to and from its service region. In all cases, the registries of the different RIRs must be consistent. [...] When Internet number resources are transferred from another RIR, the RIPE NCC will work with its member LIR to fulfil any requirements of the sending RIR. [...] When transferring Internet number resources to another RIR, the RIPE NCC will follow the transfer policies that apply within its own service region. The RIPE NCC will also comply with the commitments imposed by the receiving RIR, in order to facilitate the transfer." I am not saying that we should copy the RIPE policy proposal. I am just saying that this time, Sandra managed to come up with a very simple, clear and easy to follow policy proposal. As far as I know, ARIN has not responded or reacted to RIPE-2014-05 policy proposal. That is probably the reason why they are not responding here either. I do see that DN is discussed in the ARIN region but I have no idea if they will go away with it or keep it until they hit the wall (depletion). Kind regards, Elvis On 04/06/14 22:38, Dean Pemberton wrote: Hi Elvis, If we work on a new policy proposal, maybe we can remove DN for everything else but ARIN incoming IPs (for as long as ARIN will keep DN in their policy) and still be compatible with RIPE and ARIN policies regarding Inter-RIR transfers. I think that would cause a nasty policy fragmentation effect. I believe we should make a holistic decision about DN and stick to it. It's either something we believe is a good idea, or it's not. At the moment however we appear to be in a position of: "We don't think DN is a good idea and we'd do away with it entirely if only ARIN would continue to transfer addresses to the APNIC region" Dean _______________________________________________ apnic-talk mailing list apnic-talk at lists dot apnic dot net http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/apnic-talk