[sig-policy] Address Transfer Policy Proposal
Hi,
Given the return of the address transfer policy proposal to the SIG it
seems that the SIG has some work to do now to gather the elements of
consensus behind a policy proposal in this space. There are a number of
proposals right now, including proposal-50 from Geoff Huston, and two
proposals from Philip Smith to address some of the elements that
appeared to be missing from the most recent iteration of Proposal 50.
What we'd like to do now is to bring these disparate proposals back
together before the SIG meeting in Beijing as a single proposal, and to
that end we (Philip and Geoff) have agreed that we will work together
and with the SIG mailing list to come up with a single proposal as a
further revision to prop-50.
As well as letting the SIG members know of this development we'd like to
use this note to also request from SIG members any further feedback
regarding the issues with the address transfer policy proposal that
should be addressed in the revised policy. Our current list includes:
- transfer proposal applies to all address holdings as held by current
members of APNIC
- NIRs have the choice as to when to adopt this policy for their members
(i.e. members of NIRs)
- when a member disposes of address space using this transfer policy the
member should not be entitled to any further IPv4 allocations or
assigments from APNIC for an extended period (two years?)
- prior to the exhaustion of APNIC's IPv4 space (i.e. prior to the use
of the "final /8" allocation measures) recipients of transfers
will be
required to justify their need for address space. After this time
there
is no requirement for any form of evaluation of requirements for
eligibility.
If you have any other issues that you feel would assist this policy
gaining a suitable degree of general consensus in this community, please
let us know, either directly to us, or via this mailing list.
Thanks,
Philip and Geoff