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

[David Farmer]

On Thu, Feb 1, 2018 at 12:03 PM, David Farmer <farmer at umn.edu> wrote:

> Yes, APNIC and RIPE both allow inter-RIR transfers of ASNs.
>

For further refrence here are the applicable policies;

https://www.apnic.net/community/policy/resources#13.2.-Inter-RIR-ASN-transfers

https://www.ripe.net/publications/docs/ripe-682#3-0-inter-rir-transfers

Thanks.

On Thu, Feb 1, 2018 at 11:46 AM, Roberts, Orin <oroberts at bell.ca> wrote:
>
>> Question
>> Has any other registry already adopted or implemented such a policy -
>> Inter-regional ASN Transfers?
>>
>> Orin Roberts
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: ARIN-PPML [mailto:arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net] On Behalf Of Job
>> Snijders
>> Sent: February-01-18 12:40 PM
>> To: hostmaster at uneedus.com
>> Cc: arin-ppml at arin.net
>> Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Draft Policy ARIN-2018-1: Allow Inter-regional
>> ASN Transfers
>>
>> On Thu, Feb 01, 2018 at 12:30:31PM -0500, hostmaster at uneedus.com wrote:
>> > I would be opposed to allowing inter regional IPv6 Transfers.
>> >
>> > One of the main benefits of IPv6 over IPv4 is the reduction of routing
>> > table size.  Allowing inter regional transfers would start the road to
>> > larger routing tables.
>>
>> I'd appreciate evidence that allowing interregional transfers leads to
>> larger routing tables. Administrative resource management is somewhat
>> orthogonal to BGP announcements. Whether the resource is managed by RIR A
>> vs RIR B bears no direct relation to the BGP announcements and routing
>> tables.
>>
>> > We allowed a lot of this in IPv4 because of shortages of addresses.
>> > This is not in fact true in the IPv6 world. Growth in address use in
>> > IPv4 resulted in most networks having more than one block of
>> > addresses.  From what I understand, sparse assigment methods are being
>> > used in IPv6, allowing those few networks that actually had to grow
>> > beyond their original allocation to grow into blocks of space right
>> > next to the space they already occupy, helping to keep the routing
>> > tables smaller.  During the time we were discussing 2017-5, I asked
>> > how may ARIN members had grown beyond their original block of IPv6
>> > addresses, and I believe the answer was zero.
>> >
>> > IPv6 allows for a host to use more than one address and network.  This
>> > makes multihoming or renumbering a lot simpler than it was in the IPv4
>> > world.  I can simply provide more than one router and associated
>> > network block for each provider, and allow the hosts to obtain an
>> > address on each of them and to route between them as they see fit.  I
>> > can also deprecate one of the available networks, and all new
>> > connections will be made using the remaining networks and routes.
>> > This allows easy renumbering.
>> >
>> > It is not a big hardship to renumber in IPv6 unlike IPv4, so I would
>> > like to not end up with lots of exceptions in the routing tables, and
>> > to keep the registration records simpler.
>>
>> You are describing a very specific deployment model. We cannot assume
>> that every deployment uses that model, nor build policy based on that
>> assumption. My own experience tells me that renumbering IPv6 is as much
>> work as renumbering IPv4.
>>
>> Kind regards,
>>
>> Job
>> _______________________________________________
>> PPML
>> 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:
>> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
>> Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.
>> _______________________________________________
>> PPML
>> 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:
>> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
>> Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.
>>
>
>
>
> --
> ===============================================
> David Farmer               Email:farmer at umn.edu
> Networking & Telecommunication Services
> Office of Information Technology
> University of Minnesota
> 2218 University Ave SE        Phone: 612-626-0815 <(612)%20626-0815>
> Minneapolis, MN 55414-3029   Cell: 612-812-9952 <(612)%20812-9952>
> ===============================================
>



-- 
===============================================
David Farmer               Email:farmer at umn.edu
Networking & Telecommunication Services
Office of Information Technology
University of Minnesota
2218 University Ave SE        Phone: 612-626-0815
Minneapolis, MN 55414-3029   Cell: 612-812-9952
===============================================
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20180201/b27071cd/attachment.htm>