"After [the final /8 phase starts] there is no requirement for any form of evaluation of requirements for eligibility."
Except of course that each APNIC Member is entitled to only one /22 (at most) from the final /8.
Since there are (currently?) many more /22s than APNIC members, the lack of any other eligibility requirement does not seem to me to be unduly dangerous, although the measure may be disadvantageous for NIR members who are not direct APNIC members.
On the other hand, we have run out of IPv4 addresses, there are no more, and whether the remnant gets handed out 'fairly' [for some value of 'fair'] or otherwise, we just have to get used to the fact that we are now stuck with this "IPv6 thing".
Disclaimer: ‘The opinions expressed in this message are mine personally and do not necessarily reflect any position of my employer.’
> -----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 Andy Linton
> Sent: Friday, 4 March 2011 15:41
> To: Policy SIG
> Subject: Re: [sig-policy] prop-096: Maintaining demonstrated
> needs requirement in transfer, policy after the final /8 phase
> I'm posting this as a followup to the announcement to the list.
> You should note that there is a timing issue related to this proposal.
> It seems *highly likely* that the final /8 phase will begin
> before this policy can be discussed again in Korea. If that
> happens then we may see transfers taking place under our
> current final /8 policy:
> Prior to the exhaustion of APNIC's IPv4 space (that is, 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.
> Text from http://www.apnic.net/policy/transfer-policy#recipient
> * sig-policy: APNIC SIG on resource management
> policy *
> sig-policy mailing list
> sig-policy at lists dot apnic dot net