[arin-ppml] ARIN-prop-157 Section 8.3 Simplification
andrew.koch at gawul.net
Thu Sep 22 10:12:35 EDT 2011
On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 08:57, Tom Vest <tvest at eyeconomics.com> wrote:
> 2. Substantive objections:
> Simplicity may be a stylistic virtue, but any benefit that might be achieved by simplifying NRPM language must be balanced against the non-stylistic, practical consequences that the proposed simplification would have in the real world. I have explained at length, on this list and elsewhere, that I believe that subjecting ASNs to more liberalized transfer policies would have far-reaching and profoundly adverse operational consequences. I don't have time to recap the details right now, but you can find an excellent summary in the 2009 ISOC Brief entitled "IPv4 Affinity." Each of the problems that that paper identified with respect to IPv4 transfers would be vastly more problematic for ASN transfers.
While I find this summary enlightening on the topic as titled, I am
not making the connection with ASNs. The paper describes effects that
LSN will have in regards to Geolocation, Geoproximity and IPv4
uniqueness. Can you provide further details on how you believe these
would extend to ASNs, which in many cases are global in scope.
> I have a confcall now, but would be happy to provide more details afterward if necessary.
More information about the ARIN-PPML