[ppml] Proposed Policy: eGLOP Multicast Address Assignments -not accepted by AC as formal policy proposal

michael.dillon at bt.com michael.dillon at bt.com
Mon Mar 5 09:29:11 EST 2007

> > In any case, even if APNIC passes the policy, ICANN and the NRO can
> > still block it from being implemented if it exceeds the 
> charter of the
> > RIRs.
> How does that work?

The NRO is the mechanism by which RIRs officially coordinate their work.
If one RIR passes a policy and the other RIRs think that has exceeded
the mandate of an RIR, in particular with respect to Attachment A, item
1 of the AS MOU, then the RIRs have a mechanism, the NRO, to
communicate, coordinate and argue.

Since the RIRs are ultimately under the oversight of ICANN, if ICANN
thinks that an RIR is overstepping its authority, I think it highly
likely that ICANN would object. As for mechanism, they can always write
a public letter of complaint if nothing else.

Remember, this is an international political self-governance issue.
There are ALWAYS mechanisms even if there are no private armies.

In any case, it looks like Marshall is the victim of a very badly
written proposal combined with submitting it to the wrong place. If he
had instead petitioned the IANA and IAB to release the space defined in
RFC 3138 then I think he would have had more success. But once the space
is allocated to ARIN, we still need some clear policy guidance on how to
allocate it. The proposed policy is anything but clear and does not
contain any guidance. In fact it reads more like a marketing statement
than a policy.

--Michael Dillon

More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list