[ppml] [sig-policy] Policy Proposal: IPv4 Transfer Policy Proposal

[Raul Echeberria]

Ray:

Certainly it is a good point, but I am not 
necessarily claiming for a global or a 
coordinated policy (maybe yes), but for a global 
"and" coordinated strategy for dealing with a global problem.


Raúl


At 09:57 p.m. 11/02/2008, Ray Plzak wrote:
>Any discussion of a globally coordinated policy 
>must include an agreement between the RIRs that 
>all will adhere to the policy as globally 
>coordinated and that regional changes cannot and 
>will not be accepted or this policy will unravel 
>like the globally coordinated IPv6 policy of 
>2002. The ink was not dry on that policy before 
>the first RIR modified it thus negating the 
>efforts of a great number of individuals over a great many months.
>
>Ray
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: sig-policy-bounces at lists.apnic.net [mailto:sig-policy-
> > bounces at lists.apnic.net] On Behalf Of Raul Echeberria
> > Sent: Monday, February 11, 2008 6:32 PM
> > To: ppml at arin.net; sig-policy at apnic.net
> > Subject: Re: [sig-policy] [ppml] Policy Proposal: IPv4 Transfer Policy
> > Proposal
> >
> >
> > Geoff.
> >
> > One observation.
> >
> > Accepting transfers only within the region is a
> > way to keep the IP addresses within the regions
> > in which they were originally allocated.
> > I don't know if it is good or not, but a fact.
> >
> > If the transfer of legacy space is also admited,
> > it has a great impact in other regions, since
> > most of the unused space belonging to the legacy
> > blocks, will feed regional markets in the
> > developed countries. This is the promotion of
> > regional markets instead of global markets.
> >
> > My opinion is that the regional approach to a
> > global poblem that is the IPv4 deployment is not the right approach.
> >
> >
> > Raúl
> >
> >
> >
> > At 06:51 p.m. 11/02/2008, Geoff Huston wrote:
> > >Raul Echeberria wrote:
> > > > Could the author of the proposal explain what is
> > > > the justification for requiring that the
> > > > transferee should also belong to ARIN's region?
> > > > It is only a question and it doesn't imply any
> > > > specific opinion about the topic.
> > > >
> > > > Raúl
> > > >
> > >
> > >Raul has not asked this more generally, but as
> > >the proposer of a similar address transfer
> > >policy in APNIC that also has a similar
> > >restriction (APNIC members only) I should add a
> > >note about why this restriction is present in
> > >the APNIC transfer policy proposal.
> > >
> > >In the APNIC case its about the regional address
> > >policy group being able to define policy for
> > >themselves. In this case the policy proposal has
> > >not been submitted as a coordinated policy
> > >across the RIRs nor as a proposed global polic.
> > >It was submitted to the APNIC policy development
> > >process as a proposed APNIC policy that would apply to APNIC members.
> > >
> > >That said, I now notice that there are similar
> > >proposals in both the ARIN and RIPE regions, so
> > >it may be possible during the course of the
> > >consideration of these proposals to assess to
> > >what extent such transfer mechanisms could be
> > >extended to encompass transfers across RIRs, as
> > >Scott Leibrand has already indicated in his response to Raul.
> > >
> > >Geoff
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >--
> > >No virus found in this incoming message.
> > >Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.516 /
> > >Virus Database: 269.20.2/1271 - Release Date: 11/02/2008 08:16 a.m.
> >
> >
> > *              sig-policy:  APNIC SIG on resource management policy
> > *
> > _______________________________________________
> > sig-policy mailing list
> > sig-policy at lists.apnic.net
> > http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy
>
>*              sig-policy:  APNIC SIG on 
>resource management policy           *
>_______________________________________________
>sig-policy mailing list
>sig-policy at lists.apnic.net
>http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy
>
>
>--
>No virus found in this incoming message.
>Checked by AVG Free Edition.
>Version: 7.5.516 / Virus Database: 269.20.2/1273 
>- Release Date: 12/02/2008 09:31 a.m.