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

[michael.dillon at bt.com]

> Rather than trying to pass a global policy having each region 
> pass a reciprocity policy of sorts. 

What's the point?

Most of the time, when IP addresses are transferred, it is
coupled to the sale of network assets. Two and a half years 
ago, I worked for an American company that was acquired by
a British company. The addresses transferred to the new
owner but we do not want to shift them to RIPE. They are
still used by the same network assests. It means that we have
to pay a bit more money, e.g. $12,000 annual fees to ARIN,
but this is peanuts compared to the cost of transferring
them to RIPE and making sure that the internal systems and
people are ready to cope with this.

I don't think we are alone here. Many ISPs maintain several
RIR relationships, especially when they have network assets
in multiple RIR regions.

In fact, is there currently a barrier to doing an ERX style
transfer? For instance, imagine that a European ISP built 
a network in the USA, using RIPE addresses, and then decided
to pull out of the USA and sell it to another ISP. The new owner,
whether located in the EU or the US, decides that it wants 
to maintain an ARIN relationship for the address blocks used
in its American network. Assume that the ownership transfer of
IP addresses within RIPE has already been done. Can this ISP
transfer these addresses to ARIN under current rules?

If not, why not? What are the specific barriers? If this was
a US incorporated owner would it make a difference?

> However, I also agree with Geoff that the larger issue is the 
> potential for unintended consequences.

That's what happens when you try to fix something that ain't broke.

Quite frankly, I have not seen anything yet which sets out the
issues and shows that there is clearly a concrete problem that
needs to be fixed. So far it seems more like a game of "me too!"
but I'm not convinced that any of the participants have clearly
explained what problem they are trying to solve.

I'm not interested in policies whose rationale is jumping on
someone else's bandwagon when I don't even know where that
wagon is headed.

--Michael Dillon