[arin-ppml] Draft Policy ARIN-2019-10: Inter-RIR M&A - Seeking Community Comments / 2019-04

Joe Provo ppml at rsuc.gweep.net
Tue Jul 16 12:39:54 EDT 2019


On Tue, Jul 16, 2019 at 03:49:31PM +0000, Job Snijders wrote:
> Dear all,
> 
> (Note for the AC - it appears that discussion in context of 2019-04 is
> bleeding over into the 2019-10 thread, please take these comments under
> advisement for 2019-04. I'm sorry there is so much e-mail to plow
> through related to the policy propoals, thank you for your time.)
> 
> On Tue, Jul 16, 2019 at 03:18:22AM -0300, Fernando Frediani wrote:
> > > Sure, I believe those are your beliefs. On the flip side, my beliefs
> > > are that it should be possible to transfer IPv6 blocks from one RIR
> > > (ARIN) to another RIR, and vice versa for reasons mentioned in the
> > > last few months.
> >
> > What reasons ? Not have the do the work to renumber ? Or some Virtual
> > Machines moving temporarily in a very hypothetical situation from one
> > continent to another ? Until now I didn't see anything else than
> > those.
> 
> There are a number of reasons why transferability of Internet Number
> Resources benefits our community. We should note that these arguments
> have already been brought up on the mailing list and received supported
> by part of the PPML readership.
> 
> 1/ Currently the ARIN RPKI TAL is measurably less deployed than any of
[snip]

I fail to understand bringing this back into it. You were flatly
asked when the TAL issue is resolved, would this policy still 
be needed and your answer was yes, because of desire [citation
https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/2019-April/066381.html].
(On the topic, I'm interested to know if we've seen an uptick 
since the [recent] routinator update allowing for an easier 
acceptance of the TAL? Personally, I want to solve the RPKI
roadblocks, not create policy to allow the to remain.)

I do not believe whim is the basis of sound policy, and barring 
the actual subset of issues regarding M&A there has been no 
articulation of why non-scarce resource mobility is a Good Thing 
for the Internet as a whole. Registry shopping is counter to 
ICP-2 and I assert a Bad Thing for the Internet as a whole.

In previous threads, you seem to indicate you'd want to shop for 
services, which implies a desire for the numbers realm to have a 
split similar to that of registry & registrar in the domain space. 
Folks can draw their own conclusions regarding how well that has 
worked, but I think should the bad cases we've seen in the domain
space (bad actors, bankruptcies, etc) be inflicted on the numbers 
space, global Internet stability would suffer.

Setting aside that non-existent split, if simple & open (R,N)IR 
shopping existed, TI expect we'd see:
- *IR capture (nation-states, bad actors, industry niche)
- resources purposefully migrated to *IRs with which legal 
  interactions are "challenging", enabling criminal behavior
- heavier -> total regulation
- proliferation of new NIRs specifically to undermine the 
  bottom-up, collaborative principles.

Thanks,

Joe

-- 
Posted from my personal account - see X-Disclaimer header.
Joe Provo / Gweep / Earthling 


More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list