| | | | | | | | |
|
|
|
You're here: Home |
> Thanks for posting this data - I wonder if the result would have been > different if Option C had talked about 12 months instead of 24 months. Interesting point. Didn't take a poll on that, but I don't see any reasons for our community objecting to the change from 24 months to 12 months. Thanks for the comment! Izumi Andy Linton wrote: > Izumi Okutani wrote: > >>> B: Any address that will be transfered must be held by the >>> transfering party for at least 12 months, regardless of how the >>> address was obtained. >> C: Terry's suggestion >>> When a member disposes of address space using this transfer policy >>> the member should not be entitled to any further IPv4 allocations >>> or assigments from APNIC for a period of 24 months or until the >>> "final / 8" assignment measures are implemented. In exceptional >>> circumstances a member can submit a comprehensive plan justifying >>> an allocation. A substantial processing fee may be charged and a >>> notice of application will be posted for at least 7 days on the >>> APNIC website. > > >> FYI, we've taken the vote counts to see preference of the community >> and the results were: >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> Should Add some form of restrictions >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> yes : 13 > > no : 32 >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> If there is to be a restriction, which option should be adopted? >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> option A (original prop-050) : 0 > > option B (seiichi's suggestion) : 20 > > option C (terry's suggestion) : 18 >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > Thanks for posting this data - I wonder if the result would have been > different if Option C had talked about 12 months instead of 24 months. > > If we are to believe the IPv4 Exhaustion Counter at > http://inetcore.com/project/ipv4ec/index_en.html we don't have 24 months > to play with. That counter now estimates 703 days or ~= 23 months. Allow > another 3 months to get this policy through if everyone agrees in > Beijing and on the list and in the EC. Then allow another 1-2 months to > get things up and working at APNIC and we've got more like 18 months and > that includes the "final /8" period. > > So lets discuss Option C with a much shorter restriction that 24 months > please. I'd suggest 12 months at most. > > I'd also be tempted to leave out mention of fees in this option - that's > the job of the EC - not this group. > > andy > * 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
