[sig-policy] prop-071: Justifying receiving IPv4 address space

  • To: sig-policy at apnic dot net
  • Subject: [sig-policy] prop-071: Justifying receiving IPv4 address space
  • From: Randy Bush <randy at psg dot com>
  • Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2009 02:16:50 -0700
  • 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>
  • User-agent: SEMI/1.14.6 (Maruoka) FLIM/1.14.9 (Gojō) APEL/10.7 Emacs/22.3 (i386-apple-darwin9.6.0) MULE/5.0 (SAKAKI)
      The policy proposal 'Justifying receiving IPv4 address space' has been
      sent to the Policy SIG for review. It will be presented at the Policy
      SIG at APNIC 28 in Beijing, China, 24-28 August 2009. The proposal's
      history can be found at:
      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
      Randy, Jian, and Ching-Heng
      prop-071: Justifying receiving IPv4 address space
      Author:    Philip Smith
                  pfs at cisco dot com
      Version:   1
      Date:      10 March 2009
      1.  Introduction
      This policy proposal seeks to supplement prop-050, "IPv4 address
      transfers", by requiring recipients of transferred IPv4 address space to
      justify its use.
      2.  Summary of current problem
      Prop-050, "IPv4 address transfers", as it stands at time of writing,
      places no requirement on the recipient of transferred IPv4 address space
      to justify their need for the additional address space before APNIC
      registers the transfer.
      This can allow any organisation the opportunity to stockpile IPv4
      address space, to the detriment of the entire industry during the IPv4
      runout period.
      3.  Situation in other RIRs
      RIPE NCC
         The transfer policy adopted by RIPE only permits transfers to take
         place if the recipient can justify the need for address space to the
         RIPE NCC. Recipients of transfers cannot transfer any portion of that
         address space to another organisation within 24 months. See:
         The transfer policy specifically states the justification conditions
         under which transfers are permitted in the ARIN region - see section
         8.2 at:
         LACNIC is currently discussing a transfer proposal:
           LAC-2009-04 Transfer of IPv4 Blocks within the LACNIC Region
      AfriNIC has no transfer policy.
      4.  Details of the proposal
      It is proposed that:
         4.1 Until such a time when the prevailing APNIC IPv4 allocation
             practice uses the "final /8" policy [1], the recipient of a
             transfer is to justify use of transferred space using the
             allocation and assignment policies in force at the time of the
         4.2 After that time, no justification is needed.
         4.3 Recipients of transferred address space are not permitted to
             transfer any portion of this address space to another
             organisation for at least 24 months.
      5.  Advantages and disadvantages of the proposal
      5.1 Advantages
           - Recipients of IPv4 address transfers will have to fully justify
             receiving the address space, just as they do for any current
             direct allocations or assignments from the APNIC pool.
      5.2 Disadvantages
           - None.
      6.  Effect on APNIC members
      The proposal impacts all APNIC members in that they now will have to
      fully justify transfers they receive under proposal-050.
      7.  Effect on NIRs
      The proposal has no direct impact on NIRs, but impacts members of NIRs
      in the same way it impacts APNIC members.
      8.  References
      [1] See section 9.10, "Policies for IPv4 address space
           management in the Asia Pacific region"