[sig-policy] prop-096: Maintaining demonstrated needs requirement in tra

  • To: "Policy SIG" <sig-policy at apnic dot net>
  • Subject: [sig-policy] prop-096: Maintaining demonstrated needs requirement in transfer policy after the final /8 phase
  • From: "Terence Zhang YH" <zhangyinghao at cnnic dot cn>
  • Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2011 18:30:11 +0800
  • 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>
    • 
      The proposal, 'Maintaining demonstrated needs requirement in transfer
      policy after the final /8 phase', has been sent to the Policy SIG for
      review. It will be presented at the Policy SIG at APNIC 31 in Hong Kong
      SAR, China, 21-25 February 2011.
      
      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
                effective?
      
      
      Information about this and other policy proposals is available from:
      
                http://www.apnic.net/policy/proposals
      
      
      Gaurab, Ching-Heng, and Terence
      
      
      _______________________________________________________________________
      
      prop-096-v001: Maintaining demonstrated needs requirement in transfer
                      policy after the final /8 phase
      _______________________________________________________________________
      
      Author:        Tomohiro Fujisaki
      
      Co-authors:    Masaru Akai
                      Fuminori Tanizaki
                      Toshio Tachibana
                      Akira Nakagawa
      
      Version:       1
      
      Date:          25 January 2011
      
      
      
      1.  Introduction
      ----------------
      
      This is a proposal to maintain the requirement for recipients of IPv4
      transfers to justify their need for address space beyond the current
      allocation phase and into the final /8 phase.
      
      
      2.  Summary of the current problem
      ----------------------------------
      
      The current APNIC transfer policy removes the requirement to
      demonstrate a need for transferred IPv4 addresses after the final /8
      phase begins.
      
      However, this removal of justification of need once APNIC enters the
      final /8 phase will make APNIC the only RIR that does not require a
      demonstrated need to be shown for an IPv4 transfer to be approved.
      
      If an inter-RIR transfer policy, such as prop-095, were to be approved,
      given that any transfers would be conducted according to the transfer
      policy of the source RIR, it would disadvantage APNIC if other RIRs
      were to be able to transfer IPv4 addresses from APNIC without requiring
      any justification.
      
      Contrast this with transfers where APNIC is the recipient of the
      transfer, and must follow the transfer policy of the source RIR. Since
      all other RIRs require justification in transfers, it would be more
      difficult to have transfers of addresses into the APNIC region than it
      would for addresses to be transferred out of the APNIC region.
      
      In addition, having no justification requirement in the final /8 phase
      is raising concerns in some RIR regions and making them reluctant to
      recognize any inter-RIR transfer policy with APNIC. Therefore, it is
      possible that even if APNIC were to adopt prop-095, no other RIR may be
      willing to engage in such inter-RIR transfers with APNIC.
      
      
      3.  Situation in other RIRs
      ---------------------------
      
      All other RIRs that adopt the IPv4 transfer policy require demonstrated
      need at the time of the transfer.
      
      AfriNIC:
      
           AfriNIC permits transfers of IPv4 addresses as part of name changes
           and transfers of tangible assets associated with addresses.
           Utilization of the addresses must be verified. See Section 8.1,
           "Introduction" in "IPv4 Address Allocation Policies":
      
               http://www.afrinic.net/docs/policies/AFPUB-2005-v4-001.htm
      
      
      ARIN:
      
           ARIN policy requires that transfers to specified recipients can
           take place provided the recipient can demonstrate the need for such
           resources, as a single aggregate, in the exact amount which they
           can justify under current ARIN policies. See Section 8.3,
           "Transfers to Specified Recipients" in the "ARIN Number Resource
           Policy Manual":
      
               https://www.arin.net/policy/nrpm.html#eight2
      
      
      LACNIC:
      
           LACNIC policy has a transfer policy that will take effect when
           LACNIC or any of its NIRs becomes unable, for the first time, to
           cover an IPv4 block allocation or assignment because of a lack of
           resources. Under this policy, the recipient of the transfer must be
           able to justify its need for the IPv4 addresses. See Section
           2.3.2.18, "Transfer of IPv4 Blocks within the LACNIC Region," in
           the LACNIC Policy Manual (v1.4):
      
               http://lacnic.net/en/politicas/manual3.html
      
      
      RIPE:
      
           The RIPE policy permits transfers of complete or partial blocks of
           IPv4 allocations. The RIPE NCC will evaluate the real need of the
           receiving LIR as per the policies for further allocation. For more,
           see section 5.5, "Transfers of Allocations", in "IPv4 Address
           Allocation and Assignment Policies for the RIPE NCC Service Region:
      
               http://www.ripe.net/ripe/docs/ripe-509.html
      
      
      
      4.  Details
      -----------
      
      It is proposed that recipients of transfers continue to be required to
      justify their need for IPv4 address space after the final /8 policy is
      activated.
      
      
      5.  Pros/Cons
      -------------
      
      Advantages:
      
           - It allows APNIC to maintain consistency with the pre-final /8
             transfer policy and to observe its impact before any potential
             future removal of the justification requirement.
      
           - It places APNIC policy in line with other RIRs on the transfer
             conditions during APNIC's final /8 phase.
      
           - It will also prevent the APNIC region from having its address
             space transferred to other regions without the recipient in the
             other region needing to demonstrate a need for those addresses.
      
      
      Disadvantages:
      
           - Some may argue that justifying need is an unecessary additional
             requirement to the transfer of IPv4 addresses in the final /8
             phase and could potentially be a barrier to the accurate
             recording of transferred IPv4 blocks registered in the APNIC
             Whois Database.
      
             However, if organizations have a genuine need for IPv4 addresses,
             they should be able to explain and justify their requirements for
             transfered IPv4 addresses, as they do before the final /8 phase
             today.
      
      
      6.  Effect on APNIC
      -------------------
      
      This will change the condition of the transfer in the APNIC region in
      the final /8 phase. However, since the criteria remains the same as
      today, Members will actually not feel the impact.
      
      
      7.  Effect on NIRs
      ------------------
      
      It is the NIR's choice as to whether to adopt this policy.