Question to Hostmaster/Sec,

Would like to know how a /16 with demonstrated need of 12months was approved prior to last /8 policy (prop-062)? If that was not an issue for the LIRs to get /16 with a promise to be used in an year than how come it is so much difficult to justify the same now and extend that period in case of transfers?

Regards,

Aftab A. Siddiqui


On Wed, Sep 5, 2012 at 8:11 AM, Andy Linton <asjl@lpnz.org> wrote:
Dear SIG members

prop-104: Clarifying demonstrated needs requirement in IPv4 transfer
policy, reached consensus at the APNIC 34 Policy SIG and later at the
APNIC Member Meeting.

This proposal will now move to the next step in the APNIC Policy
Development Process and is being returned to the Policy SIG mailing list
for the final 8-week comment period.

At the end of this period the Policy SIG Chairs will evaluate comments
made and determine if the consensus reached at APNIC 34 still holds.

If consensus holds, the Chairs of the Policy SIG will ask the Executive
Council to endorse the proposal for implementation.

   - Send all comments and questions to: <sig-policy@apnic.net>
   - Deadline for comments:                       Wednesday, 31 October 2012



Proposal details
---------------------

This proposal increases to 24 months, the demonstrated need evaluation
period for IPv4 transfer recipients.

Proposal details, including the full text of the proposal, history, and
links to the APNIC 34 meeting archive, are available at:

         http://www.apnic.net/policy/proposals/prop-104

Regards

Andy, Skeeve, and Masato
*              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