[arin-ppml] ARIN-2018-1: Allow Inter-regional ASN Transfers

[Job Snijders]

On Tue, 14 Aug 2018 at 01:23, Larry Ash <lar at mwtcorp.net> wrote:

> On Mon, 13 Aug 2018 14:47:09 -0700
>   Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com> wrote:
> >> On Aug 13, 2018, at 14:42 , Job Snijders <job at ntt.net> wrote:
> >>
> >> I agree with the proposal.
> >>
> >> I think this proposal is needed and addresses practical concerns: the
> alternative to transfers is “renumbering”, and renumbering
> >>ASNs is a very costly and operationally risky proposition. There is no
> upside to restricting or forbidding this type of resource
> >>transfer.
> >>
> >> A question that remains: if you don’t want to transfer your ASN in or
> out of ARIN, then don’t, but why forbid others from doing
> >>it? All resources should be transferable.
> >
> > We can agree to disagree.
>
> I agree with Owen, I just can't see a burning need. Renumbering seems to
> be a bugaboo that is just not that difficult.


Even if you don’t see a need, would you want to preclude others from
transferring their resource if they concluded it is a requirement for their
business operation?


I would think the transfer of the ASN would as costly, difficult and risky
> as migrating the resources onto a new ASN.



I’m puzzled by your statement. Renumbering an ASN may involve operations on
hundreds of routers and tens of thousands of BGP sessions - such
renumbering clearly is costly and operationally risky.

Transferring a resource from one RIR to another RIR is paperwork between
RIRs - no router changes. A transfer and a renumbering don’t seem
comparable at all. Do you consider IPv4 transfers costly and risky too?

Kind regards,

Job
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20180814/1bbd58a3/attachment.htm>