[arin-ppml] Draft Policy ARIN-2019-10: Inter-RIR M&A - Seeking Community Comments

[Job Snijders]

On Mon, Jul 15, 2019 at 05:01:43PM -0400, hostmaster at uneedus.com wrote:
> I understand that we allow this in IPv4 only because of the shortage.
> Further, changing IPv6 addresseses is not as big of hardship as it was
> in IPv4 land, since both networks can exist during a changeover
> period. Also, each segment always uses a /64, allowing easy changes of
> the first 64 bits with automated tools in most Operating Systems.
> There is NO shortage of IPv6 addresses, so why should we cause
> unneeded expansion of the routing tables just to prevent a single AS
> from having to renumber their single IPv6 network?

Can you demonstrate how the routing tables will expand? This "argument"
has been brought up a few times, but it is not clear to me how an
administrative transfer from one RIR to another RIR has anything to do
with the BGP tables.

Kind regards,

Job