[rpd] Draft inbound policy

[Owen DeLong]

Mike,

Since I cannot remember what fraction of the discussions you ask about were
within the context of an AC meeting and what were public, I won’t comment
here about those discussions at risk of violating my ARIN AC NDA.

I will say that it is my personal opinion that a one-way policy does not
constitute an implementation of a “reciprocal, compatible, needs-based
policy”.

However, I must be clear that in this case, I speak only for myself and
do not represent or speak for the AC, the ARIN community, the ARIN staff,
or ARIN as an organization.

I am not aware of any decision which contradicts my opinion in the matter.

Owen

> On Jun 21, 2016, at 08:01 , Mike Burns <mike at iptrading.com> wrote:
> 
> I support the one-way policy although I would prefer it to be two-way.
> I understand the fears that addresses would flow out of the region; the
> LACNIC community expressed the same fears when considering a two-way policy
> last year.  Many members actually feared that ISPs in Latin America would
> voluntarily impose CGN just so they could sell their addresses!
> 
> I have experience with inter-regional transfers, I brokered the first one
> back in 2012 and have done hundreds of them since.
> I have brokered the odd APNIC to RIPE, or RIPE to APNIC, but the vast
> majority of these addresses flow from the address-rich regions of ARIN (and
> to a lesser extent RIPE) out to APNIC.
> In areas with larger supplies of available IPv4, prices are lower. So in
> almost every case the lowest price is for addresses sourced in the ARIN
> region. This drives addresses out of ARIN as buyers from out-of-region
> choose the lowest priced addresses.
> 
> By all means I think AFRINIC should avoid a strictly in-region transfer
> policy, although that beats no transfer policy at all.  We are seeing issues
> with the newly implemented intra-regional-only policy in LACNIC related to
> lack of supply. Our fear is this will naturally cause prices to rise in that
> region, or in any region where supply is constrained.
> 
> ARIN does require reciprocity for inter-regional transfers but I am not
> certain if the implementation of the policy language would actually prevent
> one-way transfers. We know that RIPE would support a one-way transfer
> policy, thanks to Tore. 
> 
> Owen do you remember if the one-way option was ever brought up with the ARIN
> staff or community and if so what the response was?  Was the word
> "reciprocal" associated with two-way traffic, or was "reciprocal" associated
> with a needs-test requirement by the recipient RIR?
> 
> Regards,
> Mike Burns
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Tore Anderson [mailto:tore at fud.no] 
> Sent: Tuesday, June 21, 2016 3:18 AM
> To: Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com>
> Cc: rpd List <rpd at afrinic.net>
> Subject: Re: [rpd] Draft inbound policy
> 
> * Owen DeLong
> 
>> I am thoroughly opposed to this policy.
>> 
>> It is not fair in that it is a one-way (inbound-only) policy. If 
>> AfriNIC wants to participate in the inter-RIR transfer process, then 
>> it should do so as a full citizen on an equal footing.
> 
> Speaking as a member of the RIPE community (but obviously not on behalf of
> the RIPE community), I do not consider this proposed policy as being unfair
> at all.
> 
> The RIPE community passed an Inter-RIR transfer policy that deliberately
> does *not* require the other RIR's policy to be two-way.
> Thus, if the AfriNIC community wants to open the door for one-way transfers
> from the RIPE region, then that is totally fine as far as the RIPE
> community's policies are concerned.
> 
> Should we change our mind about this later, it is of course possible for us
> to change our Inter-RIR transfer policy at any point in the future, e.g., by
> starting to demand reciprocity (like the ARIN community already does).
> 
> The proposed policy merely extends an invitation to the other four regions.
> It is up to them to decide whether to accept it (like RIPE) or decline it
> (like ARIN); the AfriNIC community simply does not have the power to
> unilaterally force an unfair Inter-RIR transfer arrangement onto another
> region.
> 
> Tore (who neither supports nor objects to the proposed policy; I believe
> AfriNIC policy should be for the AfriNIC community to decide)
> 
> _______________________________________________
> RPD mailing list
> RPD at afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd