[address-policy-wg] 2014-13 New Policy Proposal (Allow AS Number Transfers)

* Andy Davidson

> > - Not sure if a list of non-approved ASN transfers is useful, and
> >   concerned that it might put people off registering transfers with
> >   the NCC.

The non-approved transfer stat is a pre-2013-03 relic, and it has no
useful purpose today that I can see.

From the rationale in 2012-05: «Recording when address transfers were
denied on the basis of needs evaluation (without identifying the block
or the proposed recipient) is also important, because it facilitates
greater awareness of the impact of RIPE NCC’s application of needs
assessment policies on the transfer market.»

Since the RIPE NCC won't deny any transfer on the basis of needs
evaluation p.t., this is dead policy. 2014-05 might change that, though.

I can understand that Erik put it in there though, since the first phase
of his plan is to carbon-copy the IPv4 transfer policy, which already
has consensus so it's probably the path of least resistance. When he
gets to the second phase, to clean up and unify the now redundant and
fragmented transfer policies, we could ask him to take it out.

* Sascha Luck

> I don't understand this recent obsession with publishing lists of
> all transactions and there is no rationale given in the proposal
> for this either. I could live with anonymised lists though for
> both approved and disapproved transfers.

The RIPE NCC has published information about who receives and holds
resoures since its inception. I think transfers should be out in the
open, as well. There has been some worry of speculation and hoarding
post IPv4 depletion, with the transfer list out in the open we can all
take a look to check if this seems to be happening, and if so, if the
extent of the practise justifies further policy developement. Another
issue that was raised by RS at RIPE69 was the practise of registering
short-lived LIRs for the purpose of obtaining and transferring /22s.
The transfer list gives us further insight into this practise.

Also, one could imagine that having this information out in the open
would provide some level of deterrant against organisations who whould
otherwise do stuff against the spirit of the policy.

Note that even if 2012-05 was rescinded, transfers would still be
publicly available information. You can just compare yesterdays database
export or alloclist.txt with today's, and see what changed. But it's
a more cumbersome process though.

Tore