[sig-policy] Report on prop-053: Changing minimum IPv4 allocation size t

To: sig-policy at apnic dot net
Subject: [sig-policy] Report on prop-053: Changing minimum IPv4 allocation size to /22
From: Toshiyuki Hosaka <hosaka at nic dot ad dot jp>
Date: Fri, 22 Feb 2008 12:05:57 +0900
Delivered-to: sig-policy at mailman dot apnic dot net
List-archive: <http://mailman.apnic.net/mailing-lists/sig-policy>
List-help: <mailto:sig-policy-request@lists.apnic.net?subject=help>
List-id: APNIC SIG on resource management policy <sig-policy.lists.apnic.net>
List-post: <mailto:sig-policy@lists.apnic.net>
List-subscribe: <http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy>, <mailto:sig-policy-request@lists.apnic.net?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy>, <mailto:sig-policy-request@lists.apnic.net?subject=unsubscribe>
Organization: Japan Network Information Center (JPNIC)
User-agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.9 (Windows/20071031)


prop-053: Changing minimum IPv4 allocation size to /22
________________________________________________________________________


Dear SIG members

Below is a summary of discussion on the proposal since the last
summary was posted on 7 February 2008. We encourage you to continue
discussion on the mailing list before it is presented at the Policy
SIG session at APNIC 25 on Thursday 28 February 2008.

We particularly encourage those of you who have previously not taken
part in the discussion to express your views:

    - 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?


Discussion statistics
---------------------

Number of posts

   - Since last summary:                         8
   - Since proposal posted (8 January 2008):    16

People participating in discussions

   - Since last summary:                         4
   - Since proposal posted (8 January 2008):     6

Economy of origin of participants:               4 from Australia
                                                 1 from India
                                                 1 from Nepal

Summary of discussion since last summary
----------------------------------------

Note: The comments below refer to version two of the proposal, which was
officially posted on 19 February 2008.

    - Changing the proposal for a minimum IPv4 allocation from a
      /24 to a /22 removed objections to the lowering of the
      allocation size

    - Is the introduction of a new 'Tiny' membership tier
      appropriate?

        - The initial IP resource application fee is the
          real issue. Why is it so expensive?

        - Should fees be discussed in the Policy SIG or the AMM?


Full details of the proposal, including a link to the previous
discussion summary posted to this list, can be found at:

    http://www.apnic.net/policy/proposals/prop-053-v002.html