<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<p>Hi Owen.<br>
I think we may be starting to divert a bit from the main points of
this policy, though you brought valid points in your
argumentation. Let's try to cover some of them a little more.<br>
</p>
<p>Regarding the possibility of ISPs to form another RIR without the
support of ICANN/IANA let's face it, it is not going to happen
anytime, in any way, it's simple as that. Would they be able to
convince most or all Tier 1 networks to accept their announcements
out of the filters they current use based on the current system
and whois data ? I hardly doubt any significant portion of the
Internet would support this, specially out of the current well
established internationally RIR system and the practical effects
would be basically null. Even if they are able to convince a
significant portion of the Internet that would not enough and the
effects are equally null.<br>
This reminds me a recently (and yet again) discussion about the
possibility of using 240/4 address space and so far the conclusion
is similar. Can that be used within or without the current RIR
system ? Yes it could, but networks depending on this would suffer
at the point these resources would not be worth using or would be
of 'lower quality'.<br>
</p>
<p>These supposed impacted ISPs simple don't exist and will never
exist even without a Inter-RIR transfer policy simply because the
cost of all this work to rebel against the current system is so
costly that they would find their ways to keep going with whatever
IPv4 space they currently hold, improve their transition
mechanisms, deploy IPv6 as it happened in other regions. The cost
and hassle for this is certainly much lower than all that trouble
generated<br>
That's why discussing in forums like this one are the most
effective way to reach whatever work better for the region for the
moment.</p>
<p>I keep my view that at the moment this bring more risks than
benefit to the region, and based on real historic from other parts
of the world and that such a policy can be postponed to a later
time, been in 6, 12, 24 month or whatever the community finds more
suitable to the region whenever the time and need really comes.</p>
<p>Best regards<br>
Fernando<br>
</p>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 19/08/2019 18:19, Owen DeLong wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:FE8878E5-A74E-4203-95F7-54F4F8400EF1@delong.com">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<br class="">
<div><br class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">
<div class="">On Aug 19, 2019, at 13:42 , Fernando Frediani
<<a href="mailto:fhfrediani@gmail.com" class=""
moz-do-not-send="true">fhfrediani@gmail.com</a>> wrote:</div>
<br class="Apple-interchange-newline">
<div class="">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;
charset=UTF-8" class="">
<div text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF" class="">
<p class="">Hello Owen<br class="">
Thanks for your comments.<br class="">
</p>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 19/08/2019 16:03, Owen
DeLong wrote:<br class="">
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:DD502D22-273A-4795-AF47-2176519D6E83@delong.com"
class="">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;
charset=UTF-8" class="">
<br class="">
<div class=""><clip>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
Sanctioned how? By what power?</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">RIRs have no legal authority.</div>
</blockquote>
Oh they do, by different ways.<br class="">
When any organization becomes a RIR member and receives a
block, it is obliged to use it according to the current
rules, policies and behave according to the bylaws and the
contract they signed and agreed which by the way are
completely valid in courts and which give this rights to
RIRs to take resources back if any term is violated. There
are cases where violations on the policy or how the
organization handle the IP space can get these resources
revoked from the organization. This works like that on any
RIR, not just in AfriNIC. </div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div><br class="">
</div>
Sure, but no legal authority stops them (or someone else) from
deciding to use those same integers in a different way. They can
exit their RIR contract at any time by allowing the RIR to
invalidate that registration in the RIR system. If they can find
enough ISPs willing to accept their use of the addresses in
question and their continued advertisement of them without the
RIR registering them as such, then the RIR becomes irrelevant in
that process.</div>
<div><br class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">
<div class="">
<div text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF" class="">
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:DD502D22-273A-4795-AF47-2176519D6E83@delong.com"
class="">
<div class="">Any group of networks that want to create
their own registry system and exchange packets on that
basis are welcome to do so.</div>
</blockquote>
Yes they do, but are you probably know it is not a trivial
thing , specially being recognized but ICANN/IANA and
there are strict principles to reach before that (<a
class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/new-rirs-criteria-2012-02-25-en"
moz-do-not-send="true">https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/new-rirs-criteria-2012-02-25-en</a>).
Even if that would ever happen any blocks recovered under
the basis mentioned above would never be given to this new
registry, so the practical effect of it seems something
far from happening.<br class="">
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div><br class="">
</div>
They don’t need to be recognized by ICANN/IANA. That’s my point.
If the RIRs push too hard, then the entire system, ICANN/IANA,
RIRs, all can get bypassed by the people who run routers.</div>
<div><br class="">
</div>
<div>The new registry would have full control of 0.0.0.0/0 to it’s
own determination. It would be entirely up to the new registry
or registry system whether they wanted to honor any of the
previous IANA/ICANN/RIR registrations or not.</div>
<div><br class="">
</div>
<div>You’re continuing to fail to see that ALL OF THE CURRENT
SYSTEM operates by consent. Consent of the ISPs, Consent of
those running internet Exchanges, Consent of the end users (to
some extent), etc.</div>
<div><br class="">
</div>
<div>The power of the RIRs is limited to the consent of the RIR
participants. If the RIRs create a strong enough reason not to
consent, they can be bypassed.</div>
<div><br class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">
<div class="">
<div text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF" class="">
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:DD502D22-273A-4795-AF47-2176519D6E83@delong.com"
class="">
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">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”.</div>
</blockquote>
And that violates the rules agreed by those who form the
RIR and support its existence. Either we have rules and
policies that everybody agrees to follow to be respected
or we don't need any RIR systems.<br class="">
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div><br class="">
</div>
But the transfers may or may not involve anyone who “form the
RIR and support its existence”.</div>
<div><br class="">
</div>
<div>You are ignoring the fact that not everyone on the internet
has signed an RSA with an RIR. In fact, the vast majority of
internet users have not.</div>
<div><br class="">
</div>
<div>Everyone who chooses to participate in the RIR system agrees
to and follows the rules to some extent. Once the RIR system no
longer meets their needs, there is increasing incentive to
bypass that process.</div>
<div><br class="">
</div>
<div>On a small scale, this likely hampers those choosing to
bypass the process. However, when the process becomes
sufficiently onerous that bypass begins to occur on large scale,
then it is the RIR system which suffers more.</div>
<div><br class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">
<div class="">
<div text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF" class="">
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:DD502D22-273A-4795-AF47-2176519D6E83@delong.com"
class="">
<div class="">There’s no law that requires anyone to
cooperate with the RIR system. It’s merely convenient
and useful for ensuring uniqueness.</div>
</blockquote>
There are laws that gives full support to contracts signed
by between organizations and guidelines that must be
followed. We are not talking about something specific or
theoretic, but rather something recognized and followed
internationally. I don't think any judge would give reason
to an organization willing to act unilaterally in this
scenario we are discussing.<br class="">
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div><br class="">
</div>
Let’s hypothesize…</div>
<div><br class="">
</div>
<div>An organization was issued block A.0.0.0/8 by the IANA before
RIRs existed and without any written contract.</div>
<div><br class="">
</div>
<div>Said organization chooses to sell off 256 separate /16s to
256 separate organizations without making any effort to record
that sale in any RIR.</div>
<div><br class="">
</div>
<div>Because they can show a legitimate history to the acquisition
of the blocks even though it is outside the RIR system, lots of
ISPs accept their announcements and they are generally working.</div>
<div><br class="">
</div>
<div>Under what legal framework or theory are you going to
sanction this process? How are you going to effectively go after
any or all of those 257 organizations that never signed a
contract with an RIR?</div>
<div><br class="">
</div>
<div>
<blockquote type="cite" class="">
<div class="">
<div text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF" class="">
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:DD502D22-273A-4795-AF47-2176519D6E83@delong.com"
class="">
<div class="">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.</div>
</blockquote>
Useful policies to who ? To just a few cases, to private
for-profit companies willing to take profit of these few
cases or to majority of the members ?<br class="">
There have been different views in this discussion, while
some believe it is good for the region which is fine,
other see there are risks and possible harm to the
resources destined to the region and to majority of
organizations. Therefore it doesn't seem to be a consensus
at the moment and this is not something good at the
current system.<br class="">
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div><br class="">
</div>
I would imagine useful to the once subscribing to the RIR and
utilizing address space.</div>
<div><br class="">
</div>
<div>I never said I thought there was consensus around this policy
at this time. I said I believed it was for the good of the
region as a whole and that the risks faced by not implementing
it or something similar are greater than the risks of
implementing it.</div>
<div><br class="">
</div>
<div>You continue to repeat and point to the (theoretical) risks
posed by implementing the proposed policy.</div>
<div>I continue to point out the very real risks that occur if the
policy is not implemented. You try to convince me that there is
some force available to prevent those risks. I point out that
the force you point to is largely unable to address the risks as
they exist. This is the nature of the deliberative process by
which consensus is built or fails to be built.</div>
<div><br class="">
</div>
<div>In the end neither of us knows which way this debate will go.
In the meantime, both of our arguments are valid and should be
considered by the community. Eventually, the more convincing set
of arguments will carry the day.</div>
<div><br class="">
</div>
<div><br class="">
</div>
<div>
<blockquote type="cite" class="">
<div class="">
<div text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF" class="">
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:DD502D22-273A-4795-AF47-2176519D6E83@delong.com"
class="">
<div class=""><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family:
Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""> </span><clip></div>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:DD502D22-273A-4795-AF47-2176519D6E83@delong.com"
class="">
<div class="">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.</div>
</blockquote>
Do we have in the history any case a scenario like this
was raised ? Even with real examples of other RIRs that
didn't have a Inter-RIR transfer policy ready when they
went to Phase 2 like ? I don't think so. Everything went
on and they got a transfer policy at the correct time for
their reality. It just doesn't seem the correct time for
Africa really. The scenario of chaos if such policy
doesn't reach consensus is nonexistent.<br class="">
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:DD502D22-273A-4795-AF47-2176519D6E83@delong.com"
class="">
<div class=""><clip>
<blockquote type="cite" class="">
<p style="caret-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family:
Helvetica; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal;
font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: normal;
letter-spacing: normal; text-align: start;
text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none;
white-space: normal; word-spacing: 0px;
-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; background-color:
rgb(255, 255, 255); text-decoration: none;"
class="">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.</p>
</blockquote>
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.</div>
</blockquote>
<p class="">The same way multiple people stated opposition
to this policy for same and different reasons I raised.
Before commenting on this thread I have read every
single message discussed previously and they are there
for who wishes to take their own conclusions.</p>
<p class="">Again I am not against having a Inter-RIR
transfer policy at some point in the near future, but at
the present in brings more harm than benefits to Africa.<br
class="">
</p>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div><br class="">
</div>
</div>
Any discussion we are having here now is at least six months from
becoming an implemented policy, so instead of arguing about
whether it is harmful now, let’s talk about the near future… What
is your definition of near future? To me, it’s less than 12
months, so if we want to have such a policy within 12 months, then
the time to fine tune it and come to consensus on it is now. If
you are looking more long-term, then that’s a different story.
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">RIR policies are slow-moving. If you wait until the
policy is needed, you will spend a lot of time with needs being
met outside of policy before the policy finally gets
implemented.</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">Maybe you think that’s OK. That’s a perfectly valid
perspective, but if that’s what you’re saying, then admit it and
recognize the reality.</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">Otherwise, please consider that “unmet needs” aren’t
going to be tolerated for very long and businesses will find
ways to meet them. Preferably within the RIR system through
policy changes such as an Inter-RIR transfer policy, but
otherwise outside of the system.</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">Owen</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>