APNIC Home APNIC Home
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [sig-policy] policy proposal of applying HD ratio to IPv4

Izumi,

Thanks for clarifying JP communities position on this.
What do other LIRs in other parts of Asia and the Pacific have to say about this policy proposal? 

regards,
Save


On 13/10/2005, at 8:39 PM, Izumi Okutani wrote:


Hi, there had been some additional comments on the JP mailing list.
It's a little more specific than my previous comment, so I'd like to
share them here.

 + The proposal is no longer valid as the original assumption
   (correlation between network size and the 80% problem) is broken

 + It is difficult for LIRs to judge an appropriate utilization. The
   criteria does not really matter as long as the upstream registry is
   flexible to LIR's situation.

Izumi
on behalf of JP community

Kenny Huang wrote:


Dear all,

APNIC secretariat was tasked with the following action from APNIC 20.
To refer further discussion of the policy proposal of applying HD ratio to 
IPv4 to the mailing list.

This email is sent on behalf of the Policy SIG chairs.
At APNIC 20, the APNIC secretariat presented findings from the LIR survey to 
help progress discussions of the policy proposal [prop-020- v001]
"Application of HD ratio to IPv4"

The survey concluded that:
-40% reported they had problems reaching 80% utilization -There is no strong correlation between 80% utilization problems and network size and complexity 
measured and based on
    -number of POPs
    -number of services deployed
    -number of levels of hierarchy

The LIR survey results slides and transcripts is available at http://
www.apnic.net/meetings/20/programme/sigs/policy.html

The history and status of the prop-020-v001 can be found at http://
www.apnic.net/docs/policy/proposals/prop-020-v001.html

The question to be answered by those on this list is :
"Do you support proposal [prop-020-v001] "Application of the HD ratio to 
IPv4"
as a replacement for the current 80% measure of utilisation."
Please submit your opinions to this list, to assist us as chairs in deciding 
what to do with this proposal.

Kind regards,
Kenny Huang
Policy SIG chair
* sig-policy: APNIC SIG on resource management policy * 
_______________________________________________
sig-policy mailing list
sig-policy@lists.apnic.net
http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy
* sig-policy: APNIC SIG on resource management policy * 
_______________________________________________
sig-policy mailing list
sig-policy@lists.apnic.net
http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy