Hi,

Dne pondělí 26. března 2018 13:35:47 CEST, Staff napsal(a):
> Hi everybody,
>
> On 26.03.2018 2:56, Max Tulyev wrote:
> > If this GIR runs parallel to existing RIRs and in competition with all
> > them - that's a very good idea, I support it.
>
> Another one IR is good idea and should be created.
>
> GIR with RIRs - this is good idea too. GIR should be created and be
> independent. And members of RIR should have ability where to have there
> resources support.
>
> I support.

I don't think that it is such a good idea. First of all, I can see the problem
of such organizations which resident in multiple RIR regions, however I do
think that I can be solved by bilateral agreement between current RIRs, rather
than creating "GIR" (something between IANA and current RIRs.

I can also see that someone might see it as an opportunity to get yet another
resources, which they cannot from current RIRs. However there is no more IPv4
in IANA pool, so we would have to talk about IPv6 only "GIR" with only 32b ASN
(in contrast with LACNIC policy text). And when I look at IPv6 policies at
RIPE region (at least), there are quite open-minded with their allocation
size.

So do we really need yet another RIR? In my opinion No. It would solve just
marginal problem which does have simpler solution.

The solution might be an Inter-RIR status (e.g. source: RIPE-INTER-RIR) based
upon agreement between LIR and multiple RIRs (in which case the resources
would be assigned/allocated from one of them).

Example:
1) AfriNIC based LIR would like to operate part of its network in RIPE region
2) LIR asks AfriNIC for approval to operate outside of RIR region and provides
documentation with reasoning and corresponding RIR in which region LIR would
like to operate
3) AfriNIC decides if the LIR's proposal is fine.
4) AfriNIC asks RIPE: Is it OK? May that LIR in this case operate this network
in your region?
4) If both RIRs agrees on LIR's proposal, the AfriNIC marks LIR's resources
accordingly (like moving it to separate DB or something like operates in:
RIPE)

Certainly no RIR would volunteer their IPv4 pool to new "GIR" as LACNIC
proposal suggest and there is no more "global" IPv4 pool available...

Sincerely
Martin Hunek