<div dir="auto">Agree with this point od view and I remain opposed to the proposal as written with any possibility to transfer IPv6 and 32Bit ASN Inter-RIR even for M&A.<div dir="auto"><br><div dir="auto">Suggest it to be more clear in the text.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Fernando Frediani</div></div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Thu, 10 Oct 2019, 22:35 David Farmer, <<a href="mailto:farmer@umn.edu">farmer@umn.edu</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr">I'm fine with what Staff has been doing, the current inter-RIR policy in section 8.4 clearly doesn't allow IPv6 transfers. <br><br>However, the new text added to section 8.2 seems to clearly allow inter-RIR M&A transfers independent of what section 8.4 has to say and its exclusion of IPv6. <br>Current M&A transfers include all resource types, IPv4, IPv6, and ASN. By adding this new text without any reference to section 8.4 or a clear exclusion of IPv6 in the text added, I have to conclude the text intends to allow inter-RIR M&A transfers of IPv6 and section 4.4 and 4.10 resources, which the current section 8.2 allows.<br><br>If that is not the community's intent then the text added should refer to section 8.4 or include an explicit exclusion of IPv6 for inter-RIR M&A transfers, and 4.4 and 4.10 resources as well, if they are not to be transferred by inter-RIR M&As.<br><br>Furthermore, if you intend an inter-RIR M&A transfer to use section 8.4 to execute the inter-RIR transfer, you will need to consider the meaning the hold time in the third bullet point of section 8.4, and the effect you intend it to have.<div><font color="#333333" face="-apple-system, system-ui, segoe ui, roboto, helvetica neue, Arial, sans-serif, apple color emoji, segoe ui emoji, segoe ui symbol"><span style="font-size:16.1px"></span></font></div><br>I cannot support the text as written, the staff interpretation doesn't jive with my interpretation of the text, and I don't think the current text jives with the intent of a large portion of the community either.<div><br></div><div>Section 4.1 of the PDP says, "Internet number resource policy must provide for fair and impartial management of resources according to unambiguous guidelines and criteria."</div><div><br></div><div>In my opinion, as written this text is not unambiguous. If the community expects 8.4 to be followed to execution an inter-RIR M&A transfer the text should say that, better yet the text should clearly exclude IPv6 and maybe section 4.4 and 4.10 resources, on its own, if that is the intent of the community.<br><div><br></div><div>Thanks.</div><div><br></div><div>On Thu, Oct 10, 2019 at 8:51 PM Owen DeLong <<a href="mailto:owen@delong.com" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">owen@delong.com</a>> wrote:<div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div>Are you asking why the proposed policy doesn’t effect this change to current staff action, or are you asking why staff action didn’t change when they started accepting 8.2-based inter-RIR transfers without a policy change?<div><br></div><div>Owen</div><div><br><div><br><blockquote type="cite"><div>On Sep 30, 2019, at 11:45 , David Farmer <<a href="mailto:farmer@umn.edu" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">farmer@umn.edu</a>> wrote:</div><br><div><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr">I have a question regarding the Staff Understating of the policy from the Staff and Legal Assessment of the policy, which says the following; <br clear="all"><div><br></div>Staff understands the intent of the draft policy is to clarify handling of mergers and acquisition transfer processing between RIRs who have compatible transfer policies. The proposed change would not be a change from present practice but the policy change would make our implementation of the current policy clearer. It is understood that IPv6 would be excluded since this refers to Inter-RIR transfers in which IPv6 is not permitted to be part of the transfer.</div><div dir="ltr"><br></div><div>Where the new policy text says;</div><div><br></div>When merger, acquisition, or reorganization activity results in surviving legal entity that is incorporated outside the ARIN service region, or focused outside the ARIN service region, or is merging with an organization that already has a relationship with another RIR, then resources may be moved to another RIR in accordance with the receiving RIR’s policies.</div><div dir="ltr"><div><br></div><div>So my question is;</div><div><br></div><div>What in the new policy text justifies the exclusion of transfers of IPv6 resources for Inter-RiR M&A transfers? The new policy text doesn't directly reference section 8.4 which clearly doesn't include IPv6. However, nothing explicitly includes IPv6 in section 8.2 for the current Intra-region M&A transfers, so what excludes them for Inter-RIR M&A transfers?</div><div><br></div><div>While I agree a segment of the community doesn't want there to be inter-RIR M&A transfers of IPv6, I don't believe that is what this policy text says. If the community's intent is to clarify the status quo then and not allow inter-RIR M&A transfers of IPV6, then I believe there needs to be an explicit exclusion for IPv6 in Internet-RIR M&A transfers. Otherwise, I believe the text as written includes IPv6 inter-RIR M&A transfers.</div><div><br></div><div>I cannot support this policy as written, either the policy statement needs to be updated to explicitly exclude IPv6 from inter-RIR M&A or the staff understating needs to updated to include IPv6 for inter-RIR M&A, because as it stands, I believe the staff undressing and the policy text are inconsistent with each other.</div><div><br></div><div>Thank you. </div><div dir="ltr"><br></div><div dir="ltr">-- <br><div dir="ltr">===============================================<br>David Farmer <a href="mailto:Email%3Afarmer@umn.edu" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">Email:farmer@umn.edu</a><br>Networking & Telecommunication Services<br>Office of Information Technology<br>University of Minnesota <br>2218 University Ave SE Phone: 612-626-0815<br>Minneapolis, MN 55414-3029 Cell: 612-812-9952<br>=============================================== </div></div></div></div></div>
_______________________________________________<br>ARIN-PPML<br>You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to<br>the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (<a href="mailto:ARIN-PPML@arin.net" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">ARIN-PPML@arin.net</a>).<br>Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:<br><a href="https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml</a><br>Please contact <a href="mailto:info@arin.net" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">info@arin.net</a> if you experience any issues.<br></div></blockquote></div><br></div></div></blockquote></div><br clear="all"><div><br></div>-- <br><div dir="ltr">===============================================<br>David Farmer <a href="mailto:Email%3Afarmer@umn.edu" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">Email:farmer@umn.edu</a><br>Networking & Telecommunication Services<br>Office of Information Technology<br>University of Minnesota <br>2218 University Ave SE Phone: 612-626-0815<br>Minneapolis, MN 55414-3029 Cell: 612-812-9952<br>=============================================== </div></div></div></div>
_______________________________________________<br>
ARIN-PPML<br>
You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to<br>
the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (<a href="mailto:ARIN-PPML@arin.net" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">ARIN-PPML@arin.net</a>).<br>
Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:<br>
<a href="https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml</a><br>
Please contact <a href="mailto:info@arin.net" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">info@arin.net</a> if you experience any issues.<br>
</blockquote></div>