Re: [sig-policy] Summary of discussion: prop-95
Just a comment on geo-location. Any geo-location service that relies
primarily on any RIR whois data is fundamentally broken. Geo-location is
typically comprised of multiple technologies that end up referencing each
other. If I had to rate the validity of whois data as part of the
geo-location food chain I'd argue that it would be fifth on a list of five
inputs. It's nice if it sync's up with the other inputs, but if it doesn't
its not likely to dramatically impact anything.
And as I had mentioned, "tentative support". After reading Randy's comment,
tentative support for the context of the "policies", not specifically tied
to anyone or a single method.
Best,
-M<
On 2/22/11 8:50 PM, "Gaurab Raj Upadhaya" <gaurab at lahai dot com> wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
>
> prop-095: Inter-RIR IPv4 address transfer proposal
> _______________________________________________________________________
>
> Dear SIG members
>
> Below is a summary of discussions on the proposal to date. We encourage
> you to continue discussions on the mailing list before the Policy
> SIG.
>
> Regards,
>
> Gaurab, Ching-Heng, and Terence
>
>
> Proposal summary
> - ----------------
>
> This is a proposal to allow and define a mechanism for the transfer of
> IPv4 address space between APNIC account holders and organizations in
> other RIR region(s), providing that the counterpart RIR has a policy
> that allows transfers of address space with APNIC account holders.
>
>
> Discussion statistics
> - ---------------------
>
> Version 1 posted to Policy SIG mailing list: 25 January 2011
>
> Number of posts since proposal first posted: 11
>
> Number of people participating in discussions: 6
>
>
> Summary of discussion to date
> - -----------------------------
>
> - There was some opposition to the proposal because it does nothing
> to encourage IPv6 adoption and could complicate RIR-based
> Geolocation tools and filtering
>
> - There was a warning that without a transfer policy, transfers
> will still take place, either openly or under the table. In light
> of the difficulties regulating transfers, the best we can hope to
> do is to maintain the integrity of our registry
>
> - An opinion was put forward that organizations would avoid address
> space with 'dubious origins', but that a market with limited
> supply and no rules is a market begging to be manipulated. This
> person tentatively supported the intent of the proposal, but was
> looking for modifications in which RIRs allocation policies
> should be met and by whom.
>
> http://www.apnic.net/policy/proposals/prop-095
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.16 (Darwin)
> Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
>
> iEYEARECAAYFAk1kZ/MACgkQSo7fU26F3X3UNQCgxGTUkxNWkNXRCLmonv+Myl1W
> HPMAoPxzbZKwZsDFcoZWWlaFzD7vMpbm
> =4aKv
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
> * sig-policy: APNIC SIG on resource management policy
> *
> _______________________________________________
> sig-policy mailing list
> sig-policy at lists dot apnic dot net
> http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy