Hi APNIC Secretariat
How many transfers will be affected by prop-116-v006, since 14th Sep 2017 ?
Regards
Muhammad Yasir Shamim
-----Original Message-----
From: sig-policy-bounces@lists.apnic.net
[mailto:sig-policy-bounces@lists.apnic.net] On Behalf Of
sig-policy-request@lists.apnic.net
Sent: Monday, January 29, 2018 11:44 AM
To: sig-policy@lists.apnic.net
Subject: sig-policy Digest, Vol 164, Issue 7
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
(Sanjeev Gupta)
2. Re: prop-123-v001: Modify 103/8 IPv4 transfer policy
[SECURITY=UNCLASSIFIED] (Guangliang Pan)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2018 14:34:02 +0800
From: Sanjeev Gupta sanjeev@dcs1.biz
To: Rajesh Panwala rajesh@smartlinkindia.com
Cc: sig-policy sig-policy@apnic.net
Subject: Re: [sig-policy] prop-123-v001: Modify 103/8 IPv4 transfer
policy
Message-ID:
CABD+eScSLC18gzbmEs0WsJUsxBTKELKY5toM8QFG5EpO9fVgyw@mail.gmail.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
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 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
- 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.
- Objective of policy change
To keep the APNIC Whois data correct.
- Situation in other regions
No such situation in other regions.
- 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.
- Advantages / Disadvantages
Advantages:
- Allow APNIC to register those 103/8 transfers to keep the APNIC
Whois data correct.
Disadvantages:
None.
- Impact on resource holders
Resource holders are allowed to transfer 103/8 ranges if the resources
were delegated before 14 Sep 2017.
- References
sig-policy mailing list
sig-policy@lists.apnic.net
https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy
sig-policy mailing list
sig-policy@lists.apnic.net
https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy
