[sig-policy] prop-106-v001: Restricting excessive IPv4 address transfers

  • To: SIG policy <sig-policy at apnic dot net>
  • Subject: [sig-policy] prop-106-v001: Restricting excessive IPv4 address transfers under the final /8 block
  • From: Andy Linton <asjl at lpnz dot org>
  • Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2013 11:24:25 +0600
  • Delivered-to: sig-policy at mailman dot apnic dot net
  • Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lpnz.org; s=dkim; h=x-received:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to :content-type; bh=RDEmEWyaqs83R2E6gn8Zzwva3zodDh7GY33faqLtz6Q=; b=F6+HaL6cDRBuL7gmVUhYw8zljjN1mXVpcF0tBDXcf7ESAKVaIfxrF1ZKApQRF1/INW DbMXj+lbzpldT0eAVjqCwKUhFXwWEcZ+vp3DV2jgWTM3zs2iOf1JRKW35+1Sv4EgYgWW knpCZPDq8FAO5zHmZJniZ+Xr7wgfEN0H/1nlw=
  • 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/options/sig-policy>, <mailto:sig-policy-request@lists.apnic.net?subject=unsubscribe>
      The proposal "prop-106-v001: Restricting excessive IPv4 address
      transfers under the final /8 block' has been sent to the Policy SIG for review.
      It will be discussed at the Policy SIG at APNIC 35 in Singapore,
      Thursday 28 February 2013.
      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
      Information about this proposal is available from:
      Andy, Skeeve, Masato
      prop-106-v001: Restricting excessive IPv4 address transfers under the
                     final /8 block
      Authors:    Shin SHIRAHATA shin at clara dot ad dot jp
                  Tomohiro Fujisaki fujisaki at syce dot net
      1. Introduction
      This policy proposes to restricting IPv4 address transfers which
      were allocated/assigned from the final /8 block.
      Based on our observations of the APNIC transfer history records,
      some LIRs seems to collect IPv4 address blocks under the final /8
      range by using multiple accounts, and transfer these blocks to
      a single account. We believe this kind of behaviors are against
      the spirit of the final /8 policy.
      2. Summary
      The current APNIC IPv4 address transfer policy allows to obtain
      a maximum of /22 distribution(s) per each APNIC account holder.
      We propose add a restriction to IPv4 address transfer policy to
      restricting excessive IPv4 address transfers under the final /8
      3. Situation in other RIRs
      No similar policy at other RIRs.
      4. Details
      There are options to handle this problem.
      Option 1: Restrict IPv4 address transfers under the final /8 address
                block for two years.
          - Prohibits transfers of the address block for two years after
            receiving the distribution under the final /8 address block.
      Option 2: Set a deposit for transfers under the final /8 range.
          - Pay ten years of APNIC's annual fees for transfered address
            block in advance when receiving the final /8 address range
            by address transfer or account name change.
            If an APNIC account holder transfers the final /8 range, the
            rights associated with the advanced payment of the annual fees
            will get dissolved, and the transfer recipient must pay the
            annual fees just the same as regular APNIC account holders.
      5. Pros/Cons
          - Restricting the last /8 address range to concentrate on a
            particular account holder
          - Matches with the spirit of the final /8 policy
          - The changes may increase an incentive of underground transfers.
      6. Effect on APNIC
      Transfers from the final /8 address range will be restricted in
      7. Effect on NIRs
      NIRs need to adopt this policy.