[rpd] New Policy Proposal Received - "IPv4 Inter-RIR Legacy Resource Transfers (Comprehensive Scope)

[Owen DeLong]

> On Aug 19, 2019, at 08:32 , Fernando Frediani <fhfrediani at gmail.com> wrote:

> 

> On 19/08/2019 03:30, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via RPD wrote:

>> Hi Daniel,

>>  

>> By not having a transfer’s policy, you’re just facilitating those transfers to keep occurring, which is bad for the region. We don’t know if those transfers are being done for Afrinic legacy resources, or by “bad” employees of existing ISPs, the ISPs itself, or combinations of those options. Because they don’t get properly registered, it is impossible to know.

> As mentioned before I don't consider this a reason for any propose to pass. If there are transfers that occur "under the table" the people or organizations doing them are the wrong ones, not the RIR for not having a policy that allows. They are violating current rules and they must bind to them or be sanctioned, therefore there are actions that can be taken against these wrong actions. 


Sanctioned how? By what power?

RIRs have no legal authority.

Any group of networks that want to create their own registry system and exchange packets on that basis are welcome to do so.

Transfers occurring “under the table” are not really under the table. They are better explained as “transfers occurring outside the purview of those cooperating with the RIR system”.

There’s no law that requires anyone to cooperate with the RIR system. It’s merely convenient and useful for ensuring uniqueness.

The only power the RIRs have is the number of ISPs who choose to cooperate with the RIR system. This creates an important balancing act. If the RIRs act in a manner that is too harmful to the ability of ISPs (and other address users) to achieve their goals, then the RIR system will be replaced with something else, or worse, the internet number management will be come fragmented amongst competing registry systems and uniqueness will become difficult (at best) to maintain. OTOH, if the IP using community does not cooperate in creating useful policies by which the RIR system operates and then following those policies, it creates a similar set of problems, on the opposite side of the equation.
 

>> The data you’re asking was in my presentation.

>>  

>> Most of the transfers are leaving ARIN towards the other regions.

> Towards other regions that have already advanced to a Phase 2 like state or beyond, not the case of AfriNIC. If that would be the case they were allowed right now chances are much higher that resources escape Africa than they come from other regions. This is not just an opinion, but logic. That's one of the reasons I have been saying this brings *zero benefits* to Africa at the present.


There’s no way any policy we are discussing as a proposal today is at all likely to become policy prior to AfriNIC entering phase 2, so this argument is, IMHO, a red herring.
 

>> Also, if you have followed the discussion in the list, I’ve proposed to add some text to the policy proposal, to make sure that only starts when there aren’t more resources in Afrinic, and with some measures to closely watch the situation.

> I see your efforts and good will to get reach consensus on this proposal, but I don't really think it is the time for it, even straight after it enters Phase 2.

> I am not against having a Inter-RIR transfer policy at some point and I recognize the need of it when the RIR reaches a different scenario. This is just not the case for AfriNIC now and only exposes it to a risk of IP space to looted from the region.

> I refuse to believe that without a policy like this the region will stop growing, simple because it is still possible to get a fair amount of addresses for local organizations who need. And even when it enters Phase 2 there are multiple alternatives. When that happens we can discuss that again based on the *new reality* that will give us better support to evaluate if that will really bring advantages at that point. As illustrated in other messages LACNIC region survived 2 years without a Inter-RIR transfer policy after it went into a Phase 2 (in that case even more restricted than the one scheduled for Africa - only new entrants) and I have no knowledge of any organization that went bankrupt because of that.

> 

The question isn’t whether the region will stop growing or not… It will not. The question is whether or not the addresses being used in the region will continue to be accurately managed by the local regional registry or whether that registry will become irrelevant and be bypassed in order to facilitate that process.


> Finally with regards the point suggested in the other message to suspend the policy if outgoing IPv4 exceeds the incoming one by six month it showa there are doubts if may happen or not, so if there are doubts it is better just not to do.

> Again African organizations still don't need to go to market to get IP space, but can get directly from the RIR.

> 

I don’t think it shows doubts, I think it shows a willingness to compromise and try to assuage the fears of others.

> Therefore I propose you abandon this proposal for now and re-present it in the future when the scenario changes and a policy like this is really needed and will bring benefits to the region.

> 

Multiple people have already stated that this policy is already needed. Despite your continued assertions to the contrary, doesn’t change the facts on the ground. At this point, I think this policy is overdue.

Owen

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/attachments/20190819/f9b592ca/attachment.html>