[arin-ppml] ARIN-prop-149 Improved Transparency for Directed Transfers

[Owen DeLong]

On May 12, 2011, at 1:59 PM, John Santos wrote:

> On Thu, 12 May 2011, ARIN wrote:
> 
>> 8.3.a  In order to provide greater transparency in the transfer process
>> and provide the community the best set of tools to make routing
>> decisions as prefix disaggregation increases as a result of the transfer
>> market, ARIN shall maintain and publish a list of all prefixes
>> transfered under section 8.3. The list will identify the original prefix
>> and each subordinate prefix transferred under this policy and the date
>> each prefix was transferred.
> 
> If the same prefix is transfered multiple times, will the historical
> record be maintained?  E.G. org A transfers to org B on date 1, and
> then org B transfers to org C on date 2, would both transfers be
> reflected in the list?
> 
That would certainly be the intent, though I guess I need to clarify
the policy language to reflect that more accurately. Thanks for
pointing this out.

> If org B disaggregated the prefix and transfered part of it to org C
> and part to org D, would all 3 transfers be reflected in the list
> (A -> B, B -> C, B -> D)?
> 
Again, my intent is for ALL transfers to be reflected, so, yes, that
should show up in the record. Look for language to clarify this
intent shortly.

> Would how org A acquired the prefix in the first place, and whether it
> was a larger prefix than what it transfered to org B, also be reflected
> in the list, or is this information already available some place else,
> such as in whois, and thus redundant?
> 
Since the list would include the original prefix and each subordinate
prefix transfered, yes, that is required under the current wording.

For example, if A held 192.0.0.0/16 and transferred 192.0.2.0/24
to B, that should be reflected (at a minimum) as:

192.0.0.0/16 partially transferred 5/12/2011 as 192.0.2.0/24

> I think it is important to include exactly what information is to be
> maintained in the policy proposal, or we may find out it is not as
> useful as hoped.
> 
Does the above work for you, or, is there more or less information
that you would like to see?

Owen