Re: [sig-policy] [Sig-policy] New version of prop-116: Prohibit to trans

    • To: mailman_SIG-policy <sig-policy at apnic dot net>
    • Subject: Re: [sig-policy] [Sig-policy] New version of prop-116: Prohibit to transfer IPv4 addresses in the final /8 block
    • From: Adam Gosling <adam at apnic dot net>
    • Date: Fri, 1 Sep 2017 08:08:51 +0000
    • Accept-language: en-AU, en-US
    • Authentication-results: apnic.net; dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none; apnic.net; dmarc=none action=none header.from=apnic.net;
    • Delivered-to: sig-policy at mailman dot apnic dot net
    • In-reply-to: <93E7C3500B500248880673EAF69D44D38B68E999@Exchange-CAS.lagoon.intranet>
    • 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: <https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy>, <mailto:sig-policy-request@lists.apnic.net?subject=subscribe>
    • List-unsubscribe: <https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/options/sig-policy>, <mailto:sig-policy-request@lists.apnic.net?subject=unsubscribe>
    • References: <1502259130.61028.chku@twnic.net.tw> <93E7C3500B500248880673EAF69D44D38B68E999@Exchange-CAS.lagoon.intranet>
    • Spamdiagnosticoutput: 1:0
    • Thread-index: AQHTIvmMgHSloCQiSkqyJYC6wkY9TQ==
    • Thread-topic: [sig-policy] [Sig-policy] New version of prop-116: Prohibit to transfer IPv4 addresses in the final /8 block
      • 
        The APNIC Secretariat is reviewing the policy proposals under discussion and seeks clarification to better understand the intention of prop-116-v004: Prohibit to transfer IPv4 addresses in the final /8 block.
        
        APNIC remains neutral and objective about the outcome of this discussion and only requires clarification to ensure correct implementation, should the proposal reach consensus.
        
        - Would the prohibition apply to resources that are received as the result of a transfer? Or does this proposal only apply to delegations directly from the free pool?
        
        We appreciate your feedback.
        
        Regards,
        
        Adam
        
        _______________________________________________________
        Adam Gosling
        Senior Internet Policy Analyst, APNIC
        e: adam at apnic dot net
        p: +61 7 3858 3142
        m: +61 421 456 243
        www.apnic.net
        _______________________________________________________
         
        Join the conversation:   https://blog.apnic.net/
        _______________________________________________________
         
         
        
        On 24/8/17, 07:26, "sig-policy-bounces at lists dot apnic dot net on behalf of Stephane MATEO" <sig-policy-bounces at lists dot apnic dot net on behalf of Stephane.Mateo at offratel dot net> wrote:
        
            Hi all,
            
            - Do you support or oppose the proposal?
            I support this proposal.
            
             - Do you see any disadvantages in this proposal?
            No, personally I do not need another address range but it is at least protecting the last block for those who need some and not for the transfer market.
            Moreover, if you don't need your IPv4 ranges anymore, give it back to your RIR.
            
             - Is there anything in the proposal that is not clear?
            Fine by me
            
            
            Regards,
            Stephane MATEO
            Offratel Lagoon
            CTO
            Tel : +687 29.68.41 | www.lagoon.nc |     
            
            
            -----Message d'origine-----
            De : sig-policy-bounces at lists dot apnic dot net [mailto:sig-policy-bounces at lists dot apnic dot net] De la part de chku
            Envoyé : mercredi 9 août 2017 17:12
            À : sig-policy <sig-policy at apnic dot net>
            Objet : [sig-policy] [Sig-policy] New version of prop-116: Prohibit to transfer IPv4 addresses in the final /8 block
            
            Dear SIG members
            
            A new version of the proposal "prop-116: Prohibit to transfer IPv4 addresses in the final /8 block" has been sent to the Policy SIG for review.
            
            It will be presented at the Open Policy Meeting at APNIC 44 which will be held in Taichung, Taiwan on Wednesday and Thursday, 14 & 15 September 2017.
            
            Information about earlier versions is available from:
            
                http://www.apnic.net/policy/proposals/prop-116
            
            You are encouraged to express your views on the proposal:
            
             - Do you support or oppose the proposal?
             - 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?
            
            Please find the text of the proposal below.
            
            Kind Regards,
            
            Sumon, Bertrand, Ching-Heng
            APNIC Policy SIG Chairs
            
            
            
            -------------------------------------------------------
            
            prop-116-v004: Prohibit to transfer IPv4 addresses in the final /8 block
            
            -------------------------------------------------------
            
            Proposer:       Tomohiro Fujisaki
                            fujisaki at syce dot net
            
            
            1. Problem statement
            --------------------
            
            There are a lot of transfers of IPv4 address blocks from 103/8 happening, both within the APNIC region and among RIRs.
            
            Then number of transfer from 103/8 block are about 200, which is about 12% of the total number of transfers. This looks so high since APNIC manages about 40/8.
            
            And based on the information provided by APNIC Secretariat, number of transfers from the 103/8 block are increasing year by year.
            
            Updated by APNIC Secretariat on 27 January 2017:
            
            1) M&A transfers containing 103/8 space
            
            +------+-----------+-----------+-
            |      |   Total   | Number of |
            | Year | Transfers |   /24s    |
            +------+-----------+-----------+-
            | 2011 |         3 |         12 |
            | 2012 |        10 |         46 |
            | 2013 |        18 |         66 |
            | 2014 |       126 |        498 |
            | 2015 |       147 |        573 |
            | 2016 |        63 |        239 |
            | 2017 |        45 |        178 |
            +------+-----------+------------+-
            
            2) Market transfers containing 103/8 space
            
            +------+-----------+-----------+
            |      |   Total   | Number of |
            | Year | Transfers |   /24s    |
            +------+-----------+-----------+
            | 2011 |         2 |         2 |
            | 2012 |        21 |        68 |
            | 2013 |        16 |        61 |
            | 2014 |        25 |        95 |
            | 2015 |        67 |       266 |
            | 2016 |       103 |       394 |
            | 2017 |        70 |       288 |
            +------+-----------+-----------+
            
            And also, transfers from the 103/8 block include:
              - Take place within 1 year of distribution, or
              - Multiple blocks to a single organization in case of beyond 1 year.
            
            Further, there is a case where a single organization have received 12 blocks transfers from 103 range.
            
            see:  https://www.apnic.net/transfer-resources/transfer-logs
            
            From these figures, it is quite likely that substantial number of 103/8 blocks are being used for transfer purpose.
            
            This conflicts with the concept of distribution of 103/8 block (prop-062), which is intended to accommodate minimum IPv4 address blocks for new comers.
            
            prop-062: Use of final /8
              https://www.apnic.net/policy/proposals/prop-062
            
            
            2. Objective of policy change
            -----------------------------
            
            When stated problem is solved, distribution from 103/8 block will be consistent with its original purpose, for distribution for new entrants to the industry. Without the policy change, substantial portion of 103/8 blocks will be consumed for transfer purpose.
            
            
            3. Situation in other regions
            -----------------------------
            
            None.
            
            
            4. Proposed policy solution
            ---------------------------
            
            Prohibit transfer IPv4 addresses under /8 address block (103/8) which have not passed two years after its allocation/assignment. If the address block allocated to a LIR in two years is not needed any more, it must return to APNIC to allocate to another organization using final /8 policy. This two years requirement will apply both market and M&A transfers.
            
            5. Advantages / Disadvantages
            -----------------------------
            
            Advantages:
              - It makes 103/8 blocks available according to the original purpose, 
                as distribution for new entrants (rather than being consumed for 
                transfer purpose)
            
              - IPv4 addresses under final /8 are not transferred to outside APNIC.
            
              - By prohibiting transfer, them, it is possible to keep one /22 for 
                each LIRs state, which is fair for all LIRs.
            
            Disadvantages:
            None.
            
            
            6. Impact on resource holders
            ------------------------------
            
              - LIRs cannot transfer address blocks under 103/8. No big impact while
                they use it.
            
              - Organizations which needs to receive transferred IPv4 can continue
                to do so, outside 103/8 blocks (which should be made available for 
                new entrants)
            
            
            7. References
            -------------
            
            
            
            
            _______________________________________________
            Sig-policy-chair mailing list
            Sig-policy-chair at apnic dot net
            https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy-chair
            *              sig-policy:  APNIC SIG on resource management policy           *
            _______________________________________________
            sig-policy mailing list
            sig-policy at lists dot apnic dot net
            https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy