I believe it is APNIC's duty to distribute addresses in order to meet any valid need to connect users in the Asia-Pacific region to the Internet, for as long as APNIC has addresses to distribute. If APNIC withholds any addresses it has from the Asia-Pacific community when there is a demonstrated demand for those addresses, then to my mind it is not fulfilling this duty.
There are 16,384 /22s in a /8. As discussed during the debate on prop-062, it seems unlikely that APNIC membership would achieve even 8,000 account holders for many years yet - by when we all hope that there will be no further demand for IPv4.
This means that under the Final /8 policy that more than a /9 is likely to remain permanently withheld from the general Internet community for no apparent purpose - not even for the stated reason of the policy to provide a pool for new LIRs for transition purposes. In other words, over 8 million users (or more if NATed) who could be Internet connected with IPv4 addresses during 2012 (when they will be most needed) will be denied that opportunity because of the Final /8 policy.
Prop-088 would seem only to exacerbate this situation. I do not personally expect that many addresses will be provided to APNIC after the final IANA allocation, but I cannot support the principle of this proposal that any recovered addresses should be effectively withheld from further reuse in the Internet community.
(At least, not until such a time that the IETF might formally state that the use of IPv4 is deprecated and further distribution of IPv4 addresses should cease - I believe that it is an IETF role (and not APNIC's) to make decisions about the overall status of an entire address space.)
I therefore do not support this proposal. Regards, David Woodgate