[arin-ppml] ARIN Response to AFRINIC on Policy compatibility
daveid at panix.com
Fri Jan 20 12:09:43 EST 2017
Because they're approaching their last /8 and have maximum block limits in their policy that go into place for the last /8:
> On Jan 20, 2017, at 12:04 PM, Jose R. de la Cruz III <jrdelacruz at acm.org> wrote:
> I agree with Bill. If they are yet to reach runout, why are "external" resources required?
>> On Thu, Jan 19, 2017 at 7:24 PM, William Herrin <bill at herrin.us> wrote:
>> On Thu, Jan 19, 2017 at 3:36 PM, David R Huberman <daveid at panix.com> wrote:
>> > Last week, ARIN staff sent to this list a copy of their response to AFRINIC
>> > on inter-RIR transfer policy compatability.
>> > The AFRINIC community is considering a one-way transfer policy as a
>> > bootstrap for the few years until they reach IPv4 runout, at which point it
>> > would aim to become two-way.
>> Hi David,
>> If AFRINIC hasn't reached IPv4 runout, why do their registrants need
>> to buy addresses in the ARIN region?
>> I consider reciprocity far more important than needs testing. The LIR
>> loophole APNIC registrants continue to abuse bothers me.
>> Bill Herrin
>> William Herrin ................ herrin at dirtside.com bill at herrin.us
>> Owner, Dirtside Systems ......... Web: <http://www.dirtside.com/>
>> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
>> the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML at arin.net).
>> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
>> Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.
> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
> the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML at arin.net).
> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
> Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the ARIN-PPML