Dear Satoru

        Thank you for your question, and i mean it is really a good question!

        In my opinion, any entity got the ipv4 blocks in 103/8 before 14 Sep 2017 should have the same right to use or transfer its blocks like others.

        Not only the "One-time" thing ,but a long term right , thank you very much !!!

Alex Yang
 
From: sig-policy-request
Date: 2018-01-29 18:30
To: sig-policy
Subject: sig-policy Digest, Vol 164, Issue 10
Send sig-policy mailing list submissions to
sig-policy@lists.apnic.net
 
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
sig-policy-request@lists.apnic.net
 
You can reach the person managing the list at
sig-policy-owner@lists.apnic.net
 
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of sig-policy digest..."
 
 
Today's Topics:
 
   1. Re:  prop-123-v001: Modify 103/8 IPv4 transfer policy
      (Satoru Tsurumaki)
   2. Re:  prop-123-v001: Modify 103/8 IPv4 transfer policy (Ajai Kumar)
 
 
----------------------------------------------------------------------
 
Message: 1
Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2018 19:03:38 +0900
From: Satoru Tsurumaki <satoru.tsurumaki@g.softbank.co.jp>
To: SIG policy <sig-policy@apnic.net>
Subject: Re: [sig-policy] prop-123-v001: Modify 103/8 IPv4 transfer
policy
Message-ID:
<CAHXx+kQbpTnRduVLdTZKnyDhno0aqxHq4SbYxUqP8TMkq-VGzw@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
 
Dear Proposer
 
I would like to clarify.
 
My understanding is:
Prop-116 will be subject to the 103/8 IPv4 address which allocated before
14 Sep 2017 and be transferred after this proposal will consensus.
It's mean that these address will be allowed to transfer "ONE-TIME".
 
Is it correct ?
 
Regards,
 
Satoru Tsurumaki
JPOPF Steering Team (former JPNIC Policy Working Group)
 
 
 
 
2018-01-26 12:27 GMT+09:00 Bertrand Cherrier <b.cherrier@micrologic.nc>:
 
> Dear SIG members,
>
> The proposal "prop-123-v001: Modify 103/8 IPv4 transfer policy" has
> been sent to the Policy SIG for review.
>
> It will be presented at the Open Policy Meeting at APNIC 45 in
> Kathmandu, Nepal on Tuesday, 27 February 2018.
>
> We invite you to review and comment on the proposal on the mailing list
> before the meeting.
>
> The comment period on the mailing list before an APNIC meeting is an
> important part of the policy development process. We encourage you to
> express your views on the proposal:
>
>  - Do you support or oppose this proposal?
>  - Does this proposal solve a problem you are experiencing? If so,
>    tell the community about your situation.
>  - Do you see any disadvantages in this proposal?
>  - Is there anything in the proposal that is not clear?
>  - What changes could be made to this proposal to make it more
>    effective?
>
> Information about this proposal is available at:
>
>    http://www.apnic.net/policy/proposals/prop-123
>
> Regards
>
> Sumon, Bertrand, Ching-Heng
> APNIC Policy SIG Chairs
>
> https://www.apnic.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/prop-123-v001.txt
>
> -------------------------------------------------------
>
> prop-123-v001: Modify 103/8 IPv4 transfer policy
>
> -------------------------------------------------------
>
> Proposer:        Alex Yang
>                  yangpf6@126.com
>
>
> 1. Problem statement
> -------------------------------------------------------
>
> Policy Proposal prop-116-v006: Prohibit to transfer IPv4 addresses in
> the final /8 block reached consensus at the APNIC 44 AMM on 14 Sep
> 2017. Since that APNIC has stopped all the IPv4 transfers from 103/8
> block if the delegation date is less than 5 years.
>
> However, some of the 103/8 ranges were delegated before 14 Sep 2017.
> Those resources should not be subjected to 5 years restriction. The
> community was not aware of the restriction when they received those
> resources, some of the resources have been transferred or planning to
> transfer. If APNIC is not allow those transfers to be registered,
> there will be underground transfers. This will cause incorrect APNIC
> Whois data.
>
>
> 2. Objective of policy change
> -------------------------------------------------------
>
> To keep the APNIC Whois data correct.
>
>
> 3. Situation in other regions
> -------------------------------------------------------
>
> No such situation in other regions.
>
>
> 4. Proposed policy solution
> -------------------------------------------------------
>
> ?Prohibit transfer IPv4 addresses under final /8 address block (103/8)
> which have not passed five years after its allocation/assignment?
> should only apply to those ranges were delegated from APNIC since 14
> Sep 2017.
>
>
> 5. Advantages / Disadvantages
> -------------------------------------------------------
>
> Advantages:
>
> - Allow APNIC to register those 103/8 transfers to keep the APNIC
>   Whois data correct.
>
>
> Disadvantages:
>
> None.
>
>
> 6. Impact on resource holders
> -------------------------------------------------------
>
> Resource holders are allowed to transfer 103/8 ranges if the resources
> were delegated before 14 Sep 2017.
>
>
>
> 7. References
> -------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> *              sig-policy:  APNIC SIG on resource management policy
>    *
> _______________________________________________
> sig-policy mailing list
> sig-policy@lists.apnic.net
> https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.apnic.net/mailing-lists/sig-policy/attachments/20180129/533be3d9/attachment.html>
 
------------------------------
 
Message: 2
Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2018 16:00:44 +0530
From: Ajai Kumar <joinajay1@gmail.com>
To: Sanjeev Gupta <sanjeev@dcs1.biz>
Cc: sig-policy <sig-policy@apnic.net>
Subject: Re: [sig-policy] prop-123-v001: Modify 103/8 IPv4 transfer
policy
Message-ID:
<CAL41znM5ws5j+tu6f0StdxMzhQpT_mgFEJLONHABduTeWgnHqw@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
 
Dear All,
For M&A cases, APNIC Secretariat has clear guidelines to handle it. I fully
agree with Rajesh on it.
Regards,
Ajai Kumar
 
On 29 January 2018 at 12:04, Sanjeev Gupta <sanjeev@dcs1.biz> wrote:
 
> Rajesh, the issue will be that the Secretariat has to be given a clear
> definition of "genuine".  It is unfair to them to expect that they
> administer a rule which is not well defined.
>
> Putting a date makes life clear (not better, but clear).
>
>
> --
> Sanjeev Gupta
> +65 98551208 <+65%209855%201208>   http://sg.linkedin.com/in/ghane
>
> On Mon, Jan 29, 2018 at 1:52 PM, Rajesh Panwala <rajesh@smartlinkindia.com
> > wrote:
>
>> I partially support the policy. For genuine M&A cases , there should not
>> be any restriction on transfer of resources. M&A activities are part and
>> parcel of routine business and no one knows when will it take place.
>>
>> regards,
>>
>> Rajesh Panwala
>> For Smartlink Solutions Pvt. Ltd.
>> +91-9227886001 <+91%2092278%2086001>
>>
>> On Fri, Jan 26, 2018 at 8:57 AM, Bertrand Cherrier <
>> b.cherrier@micrologic.nc> wrote:
>>
>>> Dear SIG members,
>>>
>>> The proposal "prop-123-v001: Modify 103/8 IPv4 transfer policy" has
>>> been sent to the Policy SIG for review.
>>>
>>> It will be presented at the Open Policy Meeting at APNIC 45 in
>>> Kathmandu, Nepal on Tuesday, 27 February 2018.
>>>
>>> We invite you to review and comment on the proposal on the mailing list
>>> before the meeting.
>>>
>>> The comment period on the mailing list before an APNIC meeting is an
>>> important part of the policy development process. We encourage you to
>>> express your views on the proposal:
>>>
>>>  - Do you support or oppose this proposal?
>>>  - Does this proposal solve a problem you are experiencing? If so,
>>>    tell the community about your situation.
>>>  - Do you see any disadvantages in this proposal?
>>>  - Is there anything in the proposal that is not clear?
>>>  - What changes could be made to this proposal to make it more
>>>    effective?
>>>
>>> Information about this proposal is available at:
>>>
>>>    http://www.apnic.net/policy/proposals/prop-123
>>>
>>> Regards
>>>
>>> Sumon, Bertrand, Ching-Heng
>>> APNIC Policy SIG Chairs
>>>
>>> https://www.apnic.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/prop-123-v001.txt
>>>
>>> -------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>> prop-123-v001: Modify 103/8 IPv4 transfer policy
>>>
>>> -------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>> Proposer:        Alex Yang
>>>                  yangpf6@126.com
>>>
>>>
>>> 1. Problem statement
>>> -------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>> Policy Proposal prop-116-v006: Prohibit to transfer IPv4 addresses in
>>> the final /8 block reached consensus at the APNIC 44 AMM on 14 Sep
>>> 2017. Since that APNIC has stopped all the IPv4 transfers from 103/8
>>> block if the delegation date is less than 5 years.
>>>
>>> However, some of the 103/8 ranges were delegated before 14 Sep 2017.
>>> Those resources should not be subjected to 5 years restriction. The
>>> community was not aware of the restriction when they received those
>>> resources, some of the resources have been transferred or planning to
>>> transfer. If APNIC is not allow those transfers to be registered,
>>> there will be underground transfers. This will cause incorrect APNIC
>>> Whois data.
>>>
>>>
>>> 2. Objective of policy change
>>> -------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>> To keep the APNIC Whois data correct.
>>>
>>>
>>> 3. Situation in other regions
>>> -------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>> No such situation in other regions.
>>>
>>>
>>> 4. Proposed policy solution
>>> -------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>> ?Prohibit transfer IPv4 addresses under final /8 address block (103/8)
>>> which have not passed five years after its allocation/assignment?
>>> should only apply to those ranges were delegated from APNIC since 14
>>> Sep 2017.
>>>
>>>
>>> 5. Advantages / Disadvantages
>>> -------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>> Advantages:
>>>
>>> - Allow APNIC to register those 103/8 transfers to keep the APNIC
>>>   Whois data correct.
>>>
>>>
>>> Disadvantages:
>>>
>>> None.
>>>
>>>
>>> 6. Impact on resource holders
>>> -------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>> Resource holders are allowed to transfer 103/8 ranges if the resources
>>> were delegated before 14 Sep 2017.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 7. References
>>> -------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>>
>>> *              sig-policy:  APNIC SIG on resource management policy
>>>      *
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> sig-policy mailing list
>>> sig-policy@lists.apnic.net
>>> https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy
>>>
>>
>>
>> *              sig-policy:  APNIC SIG on resource management policy
>>      *
>> _______________________________________________
>> sig-policy mailing list
>> sig-policy@lists.apnic.net
>> https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy
>>
>
>
> *              sig-policy:  APNIC SIG on resource management policy
>    *
> _______________________________________________
> sig-policy mailing list
> sig-policy@lists.apnic.net
> https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy
>
 
 
 
--
 
(M) +91-9868477444
Skype ID:erajay
P-mail: joinajay1 at gmail.com
.................................
Please don't print this email unless you really need to. This will preserve
trees on our planet.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.apnic.net/mailing-lists/sig-policy/attachments/20180129/68ae089f/attachment.html>
 
------------------------------
 
_______________________________________________
sig-policy mailing list
sig-policy@lists.apnic.net
https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy
 
End of sig-policy Digest, Vol 164, Issue 10
*******************************************