[arin-ppml] Policy Proposal 119: Globally Coordinated TransferPolicy - revised
On Thu, Oct 28, 2010 at 11:25 AM, McTim <dogwallah at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 28, 2010 at 7:05 PM, Scott Leibrand <scottleibrand at gmail.com> wrote:
>> I don't think it should be necessary to allow addresses to leave the AfriNIC region in order to pass this globally coordinated transfer policy. As I read it, passing both, in the absence of any local transfer policy in the AfriNIC region, would simply mean that AfriNIC does not object to other regions engaging in inter-RIR transfers, and would open up the possibility of AfriNIC participating at a later date if the community so chooses, perhaps upon exhaustion of the AfriNIC free pool.
> If we pass it in the AfriNIC region, then we in the AfriNIC region
> could only participate in inter Regional transfers until the
> Exhaustion Phase as per the proposed Soft-Landing Policy.
As I understand it, if you pass this globally coordinated policy, the
AfriNIC region would not participate at all unless AfriNIC passed
local policy to allow transfers.
>> Do you still see a conflict? If so, can you explain further?
> I understand your POV, however it just seems that the Global Transfer
> Policy would be a hard sell in the AfriNIC region if the Soft Landing
> reaches consensus. AFAIK, the Global Transfer Policy hasn't been
> introduced yet in the AfriNIC region. If it is AND if the Soft
> Landing is enacted, then AfriNIC would be bound by the Soft Landing
> Policy NOT to agree to any inter RIR transfer. That's my reading of
> it anyway.
I agree, but AFAICT AfriNIC would also be bound by its lack of a local
transfer policy to not allow any inter-RIR transfers, regardless of
whether Soft Landing reaches consensus. IMO that's a feature, not a
bug: we don't want to force an RIR into allowing inter-RIR transfers
unless they decided to, via their local PDP. On the other hand, we
don't want to prevent two RIRs from allowing transfers between their
members if they so choose...