[arin-ppml] ARIN Response to AFRINIC on Policy compatibility
mje at posix.co.za
Mon Jan 23 12:34:25 EST 2017
Thanks Bill for what looks like support to the one-sided AFRINIC policy.
I agree largely with your observations. Of course, I'd prefer to see a
balanced, reciprocal policy. I did actually have one in but withdrew it
as I'm too busy with my own troubles and didn't have the time to
properly devote. Getting a one-sided policy into place is the first step
to getting a proper reciprocating policy in. We only recently had a
"local" transfer policy completed. I doubt the one sided policy will do
any damage and like I said, we'll introduce the appropriate amendments
soon, though getting it past may take a while. Africans still live with
the memory of the rape of natural resources.
On 23/01/2017 19:06, Mike Burns wrote:
> Hi Bill,
> There are very few transfers into one-way recipient NIRs, nothing substantial that I can find.
> Also this type of setup is the opposite of those free trade agreements, it means American exports and dollars flowing into our region.
> I agree the best situation would be for every RIR to allow addresses to flow like packets, across borders.
> I hope that will eventually be the case in the world and I will try to make it so.
> This is a step towards that.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: William Herrin [mailto:bill at herrin.us]
> Sent: Monday, January 23, 2017 12:02 PM
> To: Mike Burns <mike at iptrading.com>
> Cc: Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com>; ARIN-PPML List <arin-ppml at arin.net>
> Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] ARIN Response to AFRINIC on Policy compatibility
> On Mon, Jan 23, 2017 at 11:41 AM, Mike Burns <mike at iptrading.com> wrote:
>> May I point out that despite reciprocity with APNIC, almost no
>> addresses have flowed from APNIC to ARIN? I think less than a /17 in
>> aggregate since the first interregional transfer in 2012.
>> You are correct in your expectation that actual transfers aren't
>> symmetrical, because they respond to market forces.
>> As far as this policy opening the door or setting a dangerous
>> precedent, may I point out that this one-way policy has been
>> operational for years regarding certain Asian NIRs, and the precedent has not proved dangerous.
> Yeah. Market forces. The APNIC NIR non-reciprocity scam has nothing to do with the imbalance.
>> I talked to some LACNIC members who expressed an unusual fear to me, a
>> fear based on the difference in economic realities in the Southern
>> versus the Northern Hemisphere in the Americas. The fear was that
>> poorer LACNIC members would decide to re-engineer their networks to
>> take maximum advantage of CGNAT for the purposes of selling their
>> addresses, and the fear is that these sales will be to the richer
>> regions of the world, resulting in outflow and degraded local
>> Internet. Thus a potential danger is present in some minds which a unidirectional policy would obviate.
> LACNIC need not participate in cross-region transfers. Every free trade agreement between has been to our southern neighbors' benefit.
> If they don't want another, why should that be our problem?
> 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.
Mark James ELKINS - Posix Systems - (South) Africa
mje at posix.co.za Tel: +27.128070590 Cell: +27.826010496
For fast, reliable, low cost Internet in ZA: https://ftth.posix.co.za
More information about the ARIN-PPML