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

[Job Snijders]

On Tue, Jun 18, 2019 at 20:30 Joe Provo <ppml at rsuc.gweep.net> wrote:

> On Tue, Jun 18, 2019 at 07:46:42PM +0200, Job Snijders wrote:
> > On
> >  Tue, Jun 18, 2019 at 18:53 <hostmaster at uneedus.com> wrote:
> [snip]
> > There may be other reasons than ???shortage??? to administratively move
> > resources. Have you considered that others may have other priorities and
> > that there may be no clear downside to others if they use those policy
> > elements?
> >
> > I find it becoming increasingly hard to explain to anyone why IPv4 and
> ASNs
> > can move, but not IPv6. It discourages IPv6 because of lack of feature
> > parity.
>
> I am suprised to hear "those are scarce, these aren't" is difficult?
> But then I would think only speculators would view scarcity as a
> "feature" which requires "parity".
>
> > > If the policy was limited to IPv4 and 16 bit ASN's, I would not have a
> > > problem if indeed the business has moved to another region.  However,
> I do
> > > not want to see this policy being used for forum shopping. I do not
> > > want to see the "I do not like the policies of RIR A, so I am taking my
> > > ball (and my numbers) to RIR B"
> >
> > What is wrong with shopping? Competition brings out the best in all of
> us.
>
> There may be a discussion to be had when you speak of shoping for
> *services*, but every time this comes up you sidestep the difference
> of that and shopping for *policies*, which is expressly the point
> the previous poster made.



Yes, I’d like to shop for services (things like registration, dns, reverse
dns, dnssec, rpki, training, r&d). The only obstacle stopping anyone from
doing so is policy related, it seems logical to first clear that roadblock.

Kind regards,

Job
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20190618/e9745072/attachment.htm>