Re: [sig-policy] proposal prop-050-v004
Thank you very much for your kind and useful summarization
(It is very useful especially for non-native speaker like me),
but let me correct one thing.
> - Initial resources only become eligible for transfer after 24 months
My point is not only "initial resources", actually it is "each allocated resources"
since later one can cover both of "frequently repeated requests and transfers by single company"
and "initial request and immediate transfer by multiple dummy companies".
Rgs,
Masato Yamanishi
Softbank BB Corp.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: sig-policy-bounces at lists dot apnic dot net
> [mailto:sig-policy-bounces at lists dot apnic dot net] On Behalf Of
> James Spenceley
> Sent: Tuesday, March 10, 2009 3:24 PM
> To: sig-policy at lists dot apnic dot net
> Cc: Matt RobbMarkham
> Subject: Re: [sig-policy] proposal prop-050-v004
>
> So to summarize the situation:
>
> There seems to be enough opposition to this policy to
> consider that it
> doesn't have unanimous support *as is written*.
>
> Most people (myself included) have agree that if the policy is
> combined with a subsequent discussion on the major issues,
> this would
> remove any opposition/issues with the proposal itself and the rather
> "odd" method of its birth and subsequent consensus.
>
> On that basis, is everyone happy to agree the current policy has the
> consensus of the community *subject* to policies addressing
> the major
> issues being discussed at APNIC 28, with the combined result
> becoming
> the APNIC transfer policy ?
>
> As far as I can tell the major issues are;
>
> Issues (currently being proposal being written)
> - Justification of transfered resources by "Gaining" member
> - Wait period before "Loosing" member can request more resources
>
> Optional Issues (raised, but not proposed directly as being written)
> - Resources transfered to a member are not again eligible for
> transfer
> within 24 month
> - Initial resources only become eligible for transfer after 24 months
>
> --
> James
>
>
>
> On 09/03/2009, at 2:12 PM, Skeeve Stevens wrote:
>
> > I don't subscribe to the 'a bad policy is better than no policy'
> > philosophy.
> >
> > It is easier to fix this now, which I believe Phil is drafting
> > something at the moment, than passing something that could
> cause mess.
> >
> > ...Skeeve
> >
> > --
> > Skeeve Stevens, CEO/Technical Director
> > eintellego Pty Ltd - The Networking Specialists
> > skeeve at eintellego dot net / www.eintellego.net
> > Phone: 1300 753 383, Fax: (+612) 8572 9954
> > Cell +61 (0)414 753 383 / skype://skeeve
> > --
> > NOC, NOC, who's there?
> >
> > Disclaimer: Limits of Liability and Disclaimer: This
> message is for
> > the named person's use only. It may contain sensitive and private
> > proprietary or legally privileged information. You must not,
> > directly or indirectly, use, disclose, distribute, print, or copy
> > any part of this message if you are not the intended recipient.
> > eintellego Pty Ltd and each legal entity in the Tefilah Pty Ltd
> > group of companies reserve the right to monitor all e-mail
> > communications through its networks. Any views expressed in this
> > message are those of the individual sender, except where
> the message
> > states otherwise and the sender is authorised to state them to be
> > the views of any such entity. Any reference to costs, fee
> > quotations, contractual transactions and variations to contract
> > terms is subject to separate confirmation in writing signed by an
> > authorised representative of eintellego. Whilst all efforts
> are made
> > to safeguard inbound and outbound e-mails, we cannot
> guarantee that
> > attachments are
> > virus-free or compatible with your systems and do not accept any
> > liability in respect of viruses or computer problems experienced.
> >
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: sig-policy-bounces at lists dot apnic dot net [mailto:sig-policy-
> >> bounces at lists dot apnic dot net] On Behalf Of Matt RobbMarkham
> >> Sent: Monday, 9 March 2009 1:21 PM
> >> To: sig-policy at lists dot apnic dot net
> >> Subject: [sig-policy] proposal prop-050-v004
> >>
> >> Hi all, I agree with Andy Linton that the proposal prop-050-v004
> >> should
> >> go ahead as agreed at APNIC27.
> >> I don't think anyone thinks that this is a perfect policy but I
> >> believe
> >> it is better than not having a policy to deal with address
> transfers.
> >>
> >> As other members have noted there are questions that remain
> >> unanswered
> >> with this policy but Philip has already started a process
> to address
> >> some of these shortcomings. We are all free to do the
> same, to create
> >> complimentary proposals that aid this one. I don't think
> this policy
> >> should be abandoned due only to some potential abuse of it by
> >> members,
> >> given that the host masters have existing policy to address this.
> >>
> >> I support this policy even if it is not totally polished.
> >>
> >> Regards
> >>
> >> Matt RobbMarkham
> >> Network Engineer
> >> Advanced Management Systems Ltd
> >> +649 9176528
> >> matt at ams dot co dot nz
> >>
> >> Attention:
> >> This communication is confidential and may be legally
> privileged. If
> >> you are not the intended recipient, please do not use,
> disclose, copy
> >> or distribute it, other than to return it to us with your
> >> confirmation
> >> that it has been deleted from your system.
> >> * sig-policy: APNIC SIG on resource management policy
> >> *
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> sig-policy mailing list
> >> sig-policy at lists dot apnic dot net
> >> http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy
> > * sig-policy: APNIC SIG on resource management
> > policy *
> > _______________________________________________
> > sig-policy mailing list
> > sig-policy at lists dot apnic dot net
> > http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy
>
> * sig-policy: APNIC SIG on resource management
> policy *
> _______________________________________________
> sig-policy mailing list
> sig-policy at lists dot apnic dot net
> http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy
>