[arin-ppml] Integrating Draft Policy ARIN-2011-1 into NRPM 8.3

Owen DeLong owen at delong.com
Mon May 23 18:55:16 EDT 2011

Sent from my iPad

On May 23, 2011, at 17:00, "Mike Burns" <mike at nationwideinc.com> wrote:

> Hi Scott,
> In the context of this proposal, may I ask what would happen if APNIC accepted a transfer of ARIN legacy addresses and updated their Whois, even if ARIN refused the transfer?

Uncertain at best... However, I'd be _VERY_ surprised if APNIC would do such
a thing without consent from ARIN and even more surprised if they did not
reverse it upon request from ARIN.

I believe it would be a violation of the agreements in place among the NRO.

> (Because the language of the proposal pointedly excludes APNIC, if their current policy remains in place.)
> I know that ARIN could revoke and reissue.
> How is inter-RIR conflict resolved, is there a process in place for conflict resolution?

So far, it's resolved by discussion among the RIRs through the NRO and so far,
that has been successful.

> Do the RIRs generally have compatible needs-based transfer policies, I mean I know APNIC doesn't, but do the other RIRs have the same 3-month window, for example?

The 3-month window wouldn't be a requirement for a "compatible" needs-basis.
The other RIRs all have some form of needs basis so far. Only APNIC has abandoned
needs-basis altogether.

I believe that the other RIRs needs-basis policies would all be sufficient to meet
the likely interpretation of "compatible needs-basis transfer policy" except for
at least one RIR that has no transfer policy as yet.

> Is a difference in the needs window enough to prevent a transfer?

No, it would require the absence of a needs-basis altogether or some other
radical difference in the meaning of "needs-basis" such as "Need can be
satisfied by requiring an address for each goat on the given rancher's farm."

> If so, do we need to consider other RIRs  and the impact on inter-RIR transfers when we consider proposals to change the needs window?

I doubt it. I expect such windows and similar issues to be considered localized
phenomena and one of the reasons that we have RIRs instead of a single
global IR.

> What if RIPE joins APNIC with a requirement like a /24 maximum, is that something that makes the needs requirements incompatible?

I wouldn't think so at least from ARIN's perspective, but, the point of the "as long as both
RIRs agree and" part of the phrase is that it is up to the RIR staff to exercise discretion
in interpreting to what extent variations in local policy can be accommodated and still
considered compatible.

> I guess I am asking for a more detailed definition of the word "compatible" in your proposed language.
> Maybe that language is extraneous, as you are already requiring both RIRs to agree?

I don't think it is extraneous as I believe it provides a level of guidance to staff. I believe that
providing more specific guidance to staff in light of the amount of effort ongoing to change
various policies around the world would be difficult and ill-advised. I believe that providing
less guidance to staff would be too ambiguous and lead to unfortunate results. Even the
current wording may have unfortunate results, but, I think it is better than the likely
unfortunate results from current policy.


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20110523/16a16e5e/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list