[arin-ppml] Draft Policy ARIN-2019-4: Allow Inter-regional IPv6 Resource Transfers

Owen DeLong owen at delong.com
Sun Apr 7 20:16:04 EDT 2019

> On Apr 6, 2019, at 2:15 AM, Erik Bais <ebais at a2b-internet.com> wrote:
> Hi, 
> I would like to propose to focus on number resources and limit the usage of IPv4, IPv6 or AS numbers in policy text as much as possible. 
> We made this step in the RIPE transfer policies a couple years ago ( example the RIPE transfer policy : https://www.ripe.net/publications/docs/ripe-682 <https://www.ripe.net/publications/docs/ripe-682> )
> It will allow for easier / more general policies and it still allows to limit transfer limitations for specific resources.. like 16 bit AS’ns or IPv4 space. (scares resources )
> On the topic of looking for shopping for the better RIR policies or cheaper RIR’s, I don’t think that is something we should be too worried about. 
> Most RIR’s have a requirement for usage in the service region where the RIR is anyway.

Most RIRs require you to announce some or all of your space in-region. They don’t have a policy which prohibits use in other regions. As a result, most organizations that would have the option of forum shopping under this proposal would be perfectly capable of doing so and would face little resistance from those policies.

> Dis-allowing transfers for IPv6 and saying to people that they would have to renumber and request new resources from other RIR’s, will not increase the adoption of v6 usage.

Anyone who cares about not renumbering their IPv6 has already deployed IPv6, so this is a specious argument at best.

As has been pointed out by others, if you’re moving your infrastructure physically from one locale to another, you almost always end up renumbering in that process in order to support a phased move. 


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20190407/f6ff8d34/attachment-0002.html>

More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list