> On Jun 2, 2015, at 12:14 AM, Jason Schiller <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> Owen,
> 
> We didn't need a global policy to establish a bilateral inter RIR transfer 
> policy with APNIC.  Per ARIN policy "APNIC only requires a compatible needs 
> based distribution mechanism”.

Because we have the anti-flip language that this proposal seeks to eliminate.

> Why not per ARIN policy, you can transfer inside your 24 month window, ONLY 
> IF, the org is a wholly owned subsidiary, and if the org is in an RIR region 
> whose policy will prevent the transfer of addresses for at least the 
> remainder of the 24 month term.

I could live with that.

Owen

> 
> __Jason
> 
> 
> On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 9:16 PM, Owen DeLong <[email protected] 
> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
> If it were enforceable, it would address my concern.
> 
> The problem is that we are then looking to have an ARIN contract enjoin an 
> action by the organization in another RIR which I am not sure would give us 
> any recourse whatsoever were that contract to be violated.
> 
> That’s why I didn’t propose language… I don’t think the issue in question can 
> be unilaterally addressed, so I think we should accept that and those that 
> are interested can begin work on a globally coordinated policy if they desire 
> to do so.
> 
> We’ve already seen that attempting to unilaterally influence minimum policy 
> requirements on other regions is unlikely to work. Witness RIPEs recent 
> “workaround” to “compatible needs basis”. I am not especially interested in 
> expanding this problem space.
> 
> Owen
> 
>> On May 29, 2015, at 12:06 PM, Jason Schiller <[email protected] 
>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>> 
>> Owen,
>> 
>> So does this text cover your proposal then?
>> 
>> Draft Policy ARIN-2015-2
>> Modify 8.4 (Inter-RIR Transfers to Specified Recipients)
>> 
>> Date: 26 May 2015
>> 
>> Problem Statement:
>> 
>> Organizations that obtain a 24 month supply of IP addresses via the
>> transfer market and then have an unexpected change in business plan
>> are unable to move IP addresses to the proper RIR within the first 12
>> months of receipt.
>> 
>> Policy statement:
>> 
>> Replace 8.4, bullet 4, to read:
>> 
>> "> Source entities within the ARIN region must not have received a
>>     transfer, allocation, or assignment of IPv4 number resources 
>>     from ARIN for the 12 months prior to the approval of a transfer 
>>     request.
>>      - This restriction does not include M&A transfers.
>>      - This restriction does not include a transfer to a wholly owned
>>         subsidiary out side of the ARIN service region
>>         if the recipient org will be required to not transfer any IP space
>>         for the remaining balance of 12 month window."
>> 
>> 
>> On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 4:06 AM, Owen DeLong <[email protected] 
>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>> 
>>> On May 28, 2015, at 6:46 AM, Jason Schiller <[email protected] 
>>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Owen,
>>> 
>>> How does that differ from the policy text I sent?
>>> 
>>> Can you send an idea of policy text?
>>> 
>>> I thought the text I sent said that an ARIN org can transfer IPs out to 
>>> another wholely owned subsidiary in another RIR region if they have been 
>>> the recipient of transfer in less that 12 months IF the recipient org will 
>>> be required (read by recipient's RIR policy) to hold the transfered 
>>> resource for the balance of the 12 months.
>>> 
>>> 
>> Your proposal allows substitution.
>> 
>> ARIN->Other RIR space A
>> Space B Other RIR-> Money/etc.
>> 
>> I want to see substitution transfers prohibited.
>> 
>> Owen
>> 
>>> ___Jason
>>> 
>>> On May 28, 2015 8:31 AM, "Owen DeLong" <[email protected] 
>>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>>> Or simply not permit it under ARIN policy until such exists.
>>> 
>>> Owen
>>> 
>>> > On May 28, 2015, at 1:49 PM, John Curran <[email protected] 
>>> > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > On May 27, 2015, at 11:39 PM, Owen DeLong <[email protected] 
>>> > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >> My suggestion is that I don't mind (virtually) unrestricted moves of 
>>> >> addresses to different regions staying with the same organization. 
>>> >> However, if we are to allow that, I want us to find a way that you can't 
>>> >> merely use that as a way to move addresses out of flip protection to 
>>> >> then flip them to another organization via an RIR with a less 
>>> >> restrictive transfer policy.
>>> >>
>>> >> So... If you transfer addresses to another region, keeping them in the 
>>> >> same organization, no penalty. However, you are not allowed to 
>>> >> subsequently transfer them (or other addresses in that region) to an 
>>> >> external party for at least 12 months.
>>> >
>>> > That second portion that you seek would affect the ongoing operation of
>>> > another RIR, i.e. it requires them having some explicit policy to that 
>>> > effect.
>>> >
>>> > To obtain the result you seek, we either need globally coordinated 
>>> > transfer
>>> > policy in this area, or you need to make the inter-RIR transfer policy 
>>> > explicit
>>> > in this regard in determination of compatibility.
>>> >
>>> > /John
>>> >
>>> > John Curran
>>> > President and CEO
>>> > ARIN
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> -- 
>> _______________________________________________________
>> Jason Schiller|NetOps|[email protected] 
>> <mailto:[email protected]>|571-266-0006 <tel:571-266-0006>
>> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> _______________________________________________________
> Jason Schiller|NetOps|[email protected] 
> <mailto:[email protected]>|571-266-0006
> 

_______________________________________________
PPML
You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List ([email protected]).
Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
Please contact [email protected] if you experience any issues.

Reply via email to