Aftab and all,
We currently apply the same criteria (1 year need) for transfers,
exactly the same as the criteria prior to last /8 stage.
Changing the evaluation based on 2 year need will result in larger
approval size.
For example:
- Assuming that the requestor can demonstrate, with good evidence, a
need for a /17 in one year and a /16 in two year
- With the current criteria we will approve a /17 transfer.
- With the prop-104 criteria we will approve a /16 transfer.
Hope this helps in the discussion.
Regards,
Sanjaya
On 5/09/2012 4:54 PM, Aftab Siddiqui wrote:
> Question to Hostmaster/Sec,
>
> Would like to know how a /16 with demonstrated need of 12months was
> approved prior to last /8 policy (prop-062)? If that was not an issue
> for the LIRs to get /16 with a promise to be used in an year than how
> come it is so much difficult to justify the same now and extend that
> period in case of transfers?
>
> Regards,
>
> Aftab A. Siddiqui
>
>
> On Wed, Sep 5, 2012 at 8:11 AM, Andy Linton <asjl at lpnz dot org
> <mailto:asjl at lpnz dot org>> wrote:> <mailto:sig-policy at apnic dot net>>
>
> Dear SIG members
>
> prop-104: Clarifying demonstrated needs requirement in IPv4 transfer
> policy, reached consensus at the APNIC 34 Policy SIG and later at the
> APNIC Member Meeting.
>
> This proposal will now move to the next step in the APNIC Policy
> Development Process and is being returned to the Policy SIG mailing list
> for the final 8-week comment period.
>
> At the end of this period the Policy SIG Chairs will evaluate comments
> made and determine if the consensus reached at APNIC 34 still holds.
>
> If consensus holds, the Chairs of the Policy SIG will ask the Executive
> Council to endorse the proposal for implementation.
>
> - Send all comments and questions to: <sig-policy at apnic dot net
> - Deadline for comments: Wednesday, 31> sig-policy at lists dot apnic dot net <mailto:sig-policy at lists dot apnic dot net>
> October 2012
>
>
>
> Proposal details
> ---------------------
>
> This proposal increases to 24 months, the demonstrated need evaluation
> period for IPv4 transfer recipients.
>
> Proposal details, including the full text of the proposal, history, and
> links to the APNIC 34 meeting archive, are available at:
>
> http://www.apnic.net/policy/proposals/prop-104
>
> Regards
>
> Andy, Skeeve, and Masato
> * sig-policy: APNIC SIG on resource management policy
> *
> _______________________________________________
> sig-policy mailing list
> 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
>
________________________________________________________________________
Sanjaya email: sanjaya at apnic dot net
Services and Operations Director, APNIC sip: sanjaya at voip dot apnic dot net
http://www.apnic.net phone: +61 7 3858 3100
________________________________________________________________________
* Sent by email to save paper. Print only if necessary.
* 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