Hi All,
Just clarify what I'm asking for.
5.5.2 States;
APNIC will protect all registrations of Historical Internet resources with the APNIC-HM maintainer, a practice consistent with the management of current resources.
To ensure integrity of information, APNIC will not update historical information in the APNIC Whois Database until the resource holder demonstrates the organization’s right to the resources and enters a formal agreement with APNIC either as a member account or Non-Member account.
The existing 4.2.1 states;
A significant number of historical resources registered in the APNIC Whois Database are not announced to the global routing table.
To recover these globally un-routed resources and place them back in the free pool for re-delegation, APNIC will contact networks responsible for historical address space in the APNIC region that has not been globally routed since 1 January 1998.
To recover un-routed historical AS numbers, APNIC will contact networks responsible for resources not globally used for a reasonable period of time.
By my interpretation, under current Policy, APNIC doesn't currently have the power to amend the whois records for Historical Resources and enact the implementation of EC 2021-09 for routed Historical Internet resources as stated by Vivek below. Also, enacting this policy against globally un-routed resources may also not be technically valid.
If this is the case, APNIC can not proceed with its implementation from 1-Jan-2023 and needs to enact a change to the APNIC Internet Number Resource Policy to achieve these outcomes.
This brings me to prop-147 which replaces 4.2.1 with;
[Add] Section 4.3. Historical Resources Management
Historical resources that have not been claimed by the custodian will be deleted from the APNIC Whois database after 1st January 2023, and marked as reserved.
Historical resources marked as reserved have an additional twelve (12) months to be claimed by their custodians. After that, APNIC will add these resources to the free pool for re-delegation.
Furthermore, from 1st January 2023, all historical resources need to be maintained in a current APNIC account. In the event of an account closure, the historical resource will be placed in a quarantine period and then made available for re-delegation similar to current resources.
One potential interpretation is that 4.3 invalidates any form of "Original" Historical Resource referred to by 5.5.2 and replaces it with some form of "Claimed" Historical Resource or "Unclaimed" Historical Resource, in which 5.5.2 is no longer relevant. In which case, there is no point in maintaining the clause, and prop-147 should address this point.
A clearer interpretation is that they are in conflict and an update to 5.5.2 is required to adopt prop-147. Updates to 5.5.1, 5.5.3 and 5.5.4 should also be considered inline with the proposed implementation.
To be clear I am generally in favour of EC 2021-09 and prop-147.
The conversation on list about the time a former historical resource spends in Reserved status is something that needs consensus, but less relevant to my concerns.
Per Vivek, the impact on Historical resources is around 625 resources or at least 160 thousand potentially active addresses on the public, operational Internet. The potential impact for innocent Internet end-points can not be understated here. I agree that this should be clearly stated under section 5, Advantages/Disadvantages and section 6, Impact on Resource Holders, and not "None".
To be able to endorse prop-147, my outstanding questions are;
* Does APNIC believe they can proceed with their proposed EC 2021-09 implementation without Policy change?
* Does the EC currently believe, given the current state of the HRM project, that 1-Jan-2023 is still a reasonable date to begin cutting off at least 160 thousand active endpoints from the Internet, and they take full responsibility for the outcomes if enacted?
* Can the authors please address 5.5.2 and the Impact on Resource Holders assessment?
I note time is of the essence. Should prop-147 not reach consensus on this next Thursday, the next date for the Policy SIG to discuss the proposal may be Feb next year. Even if it does pass, the EC Endorsement phase is not until December giving the secretariat very little time to update and publish the new policy before proposed implementation.
Regards,
Brett O'Hara
FJ Networking.