I stand corrected, but you must acknowledge the nearly 200  successful ASN 
transfers intra-regionally in APNIC as evidence that the need to transfer ASNs 
exists. We don’t need to posit hypotheticals for that, just look at the log of 
ASN transfers. Now we are just considering the source, and short ASNs are more 
prevalent in ARIN and RIPE than in APNIC.

 

APNIC and RIPE did the heavy lifting of establishing the processes at the RIRs 
to move ASNs as they now move IPv4 blocks. Clearly those communities also 
recognized some need for this policy.

 

I believe we have established that the need for ASN transfers exists, can 
somebody give us the downside of enacting this policy? Are we afraid that the 
short ASNs, which we say nobody really needs, will escape North America? Are we 
afraid to add a few short words to the NRPM?  Are we afraid that ARIN’s 
crackerjack staff won’t survive the onslaught?

 

As a reminder, stewards should govern with the lightest touch, responding to 
the needs of the community. The community is asking for this, has been for 
years, why not do it? 

 

Regards,

Mike

 

 

 

From: Owen DeLong <o...@delong.com> 
Sent: Monday, August 13, 2018 7:05 PM
To: Mike Burns <m...@iptrading.com>
Cc: Steven Ryerse <srye...@eclipse-networks.com>; ARIN-PPML List 
<arin-ppml@arin.net>
Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] ARIN-2018-1: Allow Inter-regional ASN Transfers

 

Correction…

 

APNIC and RIPE already have policy to support this process with no utilization.

 

Owen

 





On Aug 13, 2018, at 16:03 , Mike Burns <m...@iptrading.com 
<mailto:m...@iptrading.com> > wrote:

 


I support the policy and note that:

 

The costs to implement are practically zero.

Some community members have requested this ability, who are we to gainsay their 
reasons?

The changes to the NRPM are tiny and discrete.

No downsides to the implementation this policy have been offered in any 
comments, if the need is tiny, so is ARIN staff time expended.

APNIC and RIPE are already engaged in this process with no ill effects.

 

Regards,

 

Mike

 

 

 

 

---- On Mon, 13 Aug 2018 19:00:28 -0400 Steven Ryerse < 
<mailto:srye...@eclipse-networks.com> srye...@eclipse-networks.com> wrote ----

 

+1

 

 

Steven Ryerse

President

100 Ashford Center North, Suite 110, Atlanta, GA  30338

770.656.1460 - Cell

770.399.9099 - Office

770.392.0076 - Fax

 

<1.jpg>℠ Eclipse Networks, Inc.

        Conquering Complex Networks℠

 

From: ARIN-PPML < <mailto:arin-ppml-boun...@arin.net> 
arin-ppml-boun...@arin.net> On Behalf Of Scott Leibrand

Sent: Monday, August 13, 2018 6:52 PM

To: Job Snijders < <mailto:j...@ntt.net> j...@ntt.net>

Cc: ARIN-PPML List < <mailto:arin-ppml@arin.net> arin-ppml@arin.net>

Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] ARIN-2018-1: Allow Inter-regional ASN Transfers

 

 

If you operate a network with peering sessions, and you are forced to renumber 
your ASN, you either need to convince all of your peers to set up new sessions 
(which can be a lot of work, and usually means at least some of them will 
refuse/fail to do so), or you need to local-as prepend the old ASN onto your 
new one, resulting in a longer AS path over that session.  Both outcomes are 
disruptive to a network's ability to maintain peering.

 

Given that there are valid technical and business justifications for needing to 
keep the same ASN on a network whose locus of control switches continents, I 
believe it is appropriate to allow organizations who need to do so to transfer 
administrative control of their ASN between RIRs, and therefore support this 
draft policy.

 

While it is certainly possible for some networks to easily renumber their ASN, 
that is not true of all networks, for valid technical reasons.  I therefore do 
not find arguments of the "I've never needed to do that" or "I can't imagine 
why someone would need to do that" informative or convincing.  To my mind, the 
only argument that would justify opposing ASN transfers would be one that 
details how such transfers would be burdensome to the RIRs or to the Internet 
community more generally, and would further show that such burden is greater 
than the benefit to those organizations it would help.  As I, Job, and others 
have detailed the kind of organization that would be benefited by this 
proposal, it's not sufficient to assert that such organization do not (or 
should not) exist.

 

-Scott

 

On Mon, Aug 13, 2018 at 3:36 PM Job Snijders < <mailto:j...@ntt.net> 
j...@ntt.net> wrote:

On Tue, 14 Aug 2018 at 01:23, Larry Ash < <mailto:l...@mwtcorp.net> 
l...@mwtcorp.net> wrote:

On Mon, 13 Aug 2018 14:47:09 -0700

  Owen DeLong < <mailto:o...@delong.com> o...@delong.com> wrote:

>> On Aug 13, 2018, at 14:42 , Job Snijders < <mailto:j...@ntt.net> 
>> j...@ntt.net> wrote:

>> 

>> I agree with the proposal.

>> 

>> I think this proposal is needed and addresses practical concerns: the 
>> alternative to transfers is “renumbering”, and renumbering 

>>ASNs is a very costly and operationally risky proposition. There is no upside 
>>to restricting or forbidding this type of resource 

>>transfer.

>> 

>> A question that remains: if you don’t want to transfer your ASN in or out of 
>> ARIN, then don’t, but why forbid others from doing 

>>it? All resources should be transferable.

> 

> We can agree to disagree.

 

I agree with Owen, I just can't see a burning need. Renumbering seems to be a 
bugaboo that is just not that difficult.

 

 

Even if you don’t see a need, would you want to preclude others from 
transferring their resource if they concluded it is a requirement for their 
business operation?

 

 

I would think the transfer of the ASN would as costly, difficult and risky as 
migrating the resources onto a new ASN.

 

 

I’m puzzled by your statement. Renumbering an ASN may involve operations on 
hundreds of routers and tens of thousands of BGP sessions - such renumbering 
clearly is costly and operationally risky.

 

Transferring a resource from one RIR to another RIR is paperwork between RIRs - 
no router changes. A transfer and a renumbering don’t seem comparable at all. 
Do you consider IPv4 transfers costly and risky too?

 

Kind regards,

 

Job

_______________________________________________

ARIN-PPML

You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to

the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List ( <mailto:ARIN-PPML@arin.net> 
ARIN-PPML@arin.net).

Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:

 <https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml> 
https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml

Please contact  <mailto:i...@arin.net> i...@arin.net if you experience any 
issues.

 

_______________________________________________

ARIN-PPML 

You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to 

the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List ( <mailto:ARIN-PPML@arin.net> 
ARIN-PPML@arin.net). 

Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: 

 <https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml> 
https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml 

Please contact  <mailto:i...@arin.net> i...@arin.net if you experience any 
issues. 

 

 


_______________________________________________
ARIN-PPML
You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List ( <mailto:ARIN-PPML@arin.net> 
ARIN-PPML@arin.net).
Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
 <https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml> 
https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
Please contact  <mailto:i...@arin.net> i...@arin.net if you experience any 
issues.

 

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

Reply via email to