Hello Jordi,
There is no difference between this proposal and actual assignments that an ISP with an APNIC allocations can do.
If there is no difference between this proposal and the current way in which networks sub-assign resources to their customers, what benefit does this proposal bring that we do not already have and/or what issue does this proposal aim to address?
If ISP A got an APNIC allocation. Then ISP A is doing an assignment to customers B, and customer B is acting against the policies, APNIC is perfectly entitled to warn the ISP A and even start a recovery and closure account, because it is the responsibility of A to ensure that the policies are followed with all their resources.
Yes, this is correct, if A remained the registrant. Let's apply this proposal to this scenario. If A temporarily transferred their resources to B, then B would become the resource holder of the resources for the period. How can APNIC recover resources from A if they are not the resource holder?
Regarding ROSE-T, APNIC can just ask for a kind of ?certification? with that tool, or even work with MANRS in order to facilitate that. There is no need to grant external access you just need to see the results.
And this could very easily be falsified with APNIC having no way to validate/verify its authenticity.
The downsides to this proposal far outweigh the upsides, along with the resources required to manage temporary transfers potentially being substantial, thus drawing the resources away from other areas of APNIC.
Regards,
Christopher Hawker
_______________________________________________ SIG-policy - https://mailman.apnic.net/[email protected]/ To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
