Hello
On 11/12/2023 09:38, Christopher Hawker wrote:
<clip>
1. If a current IXP applies for space under this policy, they should be restricted
from transferring new or existing delegations under any transfer conditions to
prevent existing IXPs from applying for resources under this policy, renumbering
their existing IXPs and then selling their old space. Should there be a requirement
for a transfer under Mergers & Acquisitions, then the recipient acquiring the
IXP or the organisation that the IXP is being merged into should be required to
apply for a new delegation and renumber accordingly. This will not apply if the
source and recipient members are identical in structure (i.e. same directors and
shareholders, and the transfer is simply an organisation restructure).
I tend to agre with this restriction. It would not be fair with the
community with such behavior. If an IXP applies and receives space under
this policy this could be for a newer location,but not to be used in a
existing one to be sold/transferred to make money if it.
If there is a Merger & Acquisition the newer entity must be an IXP,
otherwise this space should be returned to ARIN and be used exclusively
for the same proposes initially justified.
2. New IXPs need to be able to demonstrate that they have the infrastructure to
do so, to prevent people from applying for the sake of holding space and not
actually using it. Given that new IXPs may not be willing to procure equipment
for the operation of the IXP or enter into an contract with a datacentre
provider unless the application for resources is approved, the APNIC
Secretariat may elect to provide pre-approval for IP space, subject to the
provisioning of a contract or other service agreement with a datacentre
operator and purchase documentation (in the name of the organisation operating
the IXP) being provided for space and infrastructure to operate the IXP.
Sure thing.
3. IXP delegations should have a caveat placed upon them that prevents them
from being globally routed, regardless of the size.
I often hear this about blocks assigned to IXPs and I don't fully agree.
IXPs may choose to use globally routed blocks for its own infrastructure
(portal, etc) and that is a fair usage. Normally it is not necessary for
most cases and specially for the block used for the MLPA but may not be
for all cases.
I reckon it may make more difficult for APNIC to keep an eye that the
receiver is using it correctly but at the end it still may be a
justifiable usage.
Fernando
_______________________________________________
SIG-policy - https://mailman.apnic.net/[email protected]/
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
_______________________________________________
SIG-policy - https://mailman.apnic.net/[email protected]/
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
