Re: [sig-policy] IPv4 transfer proposals {Security = Unclassified}
that there are questions on the related policy proposals in the ARIN region.
One clarification regarding a comment about ISPs following the ICANN/IANA/RIR
in-addr system (or alternatives that might result from disallowing transfers) -
On Feb 8, 2011, at 4:40 PM, David Conrad wrote:
> However, ignoring that, it would be very interesting to see what would happen if the RIRs were to disallow an in-addr.arpa update because the administrator of the space was using a different registry. I suspect the results would largely depend on the anti-trust/anti-cartel laws in the RIR's (or ICANN's) legal venue.
I note that ICANN has a formal process for recognizing additional registries
(which would then allow updating of IN-ADDR); it is well documented in the
global process ICP-2 <http://www.icann.org/en/icp/icp-2.htm> which went through
all of the RIRs policy processes and was ratified by ICANN's Board. To the
extent that a party had a concern about IANA not recognizing their desire to
update in-addr to alternative views, that appears very clearly to be a concern
that they would need to take to ICANN.
This does not mean that outcome of such a situation is certain in any way, but
clarity is best if this is to be considered a factor in considering proposals.
FYI,
/John
John Curran
President and CEO
ARIN