[arin-ppml] 2008-6: Emergency Transfer Policy for IPv4 Addresses

[Owen DeLong]

On Oct 9, 2008, at 9:39 AM, Milton L Mueller wrote:

>
>> On Oct 6, 2008, at 9:27 AM, Randy Bush wrote:
>>
>>> and this is not a problem if you get the space from an rir, only if
>>> you buy it on an open market.  cool!
>>>
>>> randy
>>
>> That's right Randy. To recap from last week, what makes routing keep
>> working under the current paradigm?
>>
>> 1. CIDR  -- which provides the basic tools.
>
> Which still exists if there are transfers...
>
But becomes SIGNIFICANTLY less effective and virtually ineffective
under the proposals being considered in APNIC and RIPE.

>> 2. Top-level aggregation -- which the RIR community-system provided,
>> and kept flexible over time as technology improved and RIR community
>> practices changed.
>
> Which still exists if there are transfers...
>
But is SIGNIFICANTLY eroded by de-aggregation created by partial  
transfers.

>> 3. Filtering -- which was/is only commercially feasible because of  
>> the
>> top-level aggregation made possible by the RIR community-system.
>
> Which still exists if there are transfers...
>
But renders many transferred addresses potentially useless.

>> 4. Open entry for new routing service providers, which the arms- 
>> length
>
> Which becomes more limited due to ipv4 scarcity with or without
> transfers
>

Yep.

Owen