[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [sig-policy] Open Request Regarding Address Transfer Policy Proposals
David,
I'm more than comfortable with this collaborative approach, and if a
new policy proposal that is the amalgam of the preceding work is the
agreed result - all the better.
If I can ask the chairs to clearly signpost the items during
discussion, i would be most appreciative as I'll be following remotely.
a few points in-line.
On 19/02/2009, at 3:54 PM, David Woodgate wrote:
I believe that the relevant sub-proposals are that:
1-3 no contention.
4. The minimum permissible size of a sub-transfer of an APNIC address
block should be EITHER a /24 OR minimum APNIC policy size
- (To be decided)
- That satisfies the rules of the receiver's *IR policies.
5. Address transfers should be justified to and scrutinised by APNIC
Sorry to quibble over wording, but this is probably a little terse.
I think just so long as it satisfies APNIC policy and membership status.
6. Address transfers should EITHER be enabled immediately, OR only
enabled after particular criteria have been met
- For example, once APNIC has reached its last /8
- (To be decided)
That reminds me, James - what specifically are your concerns that may
lead to a detrimental impact on the community?
7. APNIC should maintain a public log of the allocation history of
an address
8. APNIC members transferring address blocks to others should not be
eligible to receive additional address blocks for at least two years.
I don't think I would be prescriptive with the time frame at this
juncture.
(ie could be any scale from 6 months to 10 years)
Cheers
Terry
