Hi Izumi,I don't know if it helps at all but I was mindful of this need for a clear "history" of an address in an environment of address transfers and included in prop-50 the explicit requirement for a public record of such transactions: "The following transfer details will be published by APNIC in a public log of resource transfers: - Source - Recipient - Address resources - Date of transfer"
Whether the precise details are appropriate or not is perhaps a matter for further thought, but the general need to understand the previous circumstances of the parties to a transfer in terms of past transfers where they were a party, and the previous movement of the address resources in question, is often helpful in understanding whether the proposed transfer should be regarded with appropriate confidence or not. Its not all the information one may need, but it appears that it would be generally helpful information, or at least that what I had thought would be useful in terms of registry-published information in such an environment.
regards, Geoff, author of prop-50 in this case On 17/02/2009, at 8:57 PM, Izumi Okutani wrote:
Paul, Thanks for the response from APNIC. I understand this is something that requires some considerations and change in the way APNIC provides data to the community. It's difficult for me to see if the needs are specific to Japan or can be commonly share as the region, so I'd be interested to hear what the others say in Manila too. izumi