Keyboard Shortcuts
Thread View
j: Next unread messagek: Previous unread messagej a: Jump to all threadsj l: Jump to MailingList overview
Dear Satoru
Thank you for your question, and i mean it is really a good question!
In my opinion, any entity got the ipv4 blocks in 103/8 before 14 Sep 2017 should have the same right to use or transfer its blocks like others.
Not only the "One-time" thing ,but a long term right , thank you very much !!!
Alex Yang
From: sig-policy-request Date: 2018-01-29 18:30 To: sig-policy Subject: sig-policy Digest, Vol 164, Issue 10 Send sig-policy mailing list submissions to sig-policy@lists.apnic.net
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to sig-policy-request@lists.apnic.net
You can reach the person managing the list at sig-policy-owner@lists.apnic.net
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of sig-policy digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. Re: prop-123-v001: Modify 103/8 IPv4 transfer policy (Satoru Tsurumaki) 2. Re: prop-123-v001: Modify 103/8 IPv4 transfer policy (Ajai Kumar)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1 Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2018 19:03:38 +0900 From: Satoru Tsurumaki satoru.tsurumaki@g.softbank.co.jp To: SIG policy sig-policy@apnic.net Subject: Re: [sig-policy] prop-123-v001: Modify 103/8 IPv4 transfer policy Message-ID: CAHXx+kQbpTnRduVLdTZKnyDhno0aqxHq4SbYxUqP8TMkq-VGzw@mail.gmail.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Dear Proposer
I would like to clarify.
My understanding is: Prop-116 will be subject to the 103/8 IPv4 address which allocated before 14 Sep 2017 and be transferred after this proposal will consensus. It's mean that these address will be allowed to transfer "ONE-TIME".
Is it correct ?
Regards,
Satoru Tsurumaki JPOPF Steering Team (former JPNIC Policy Working Group)
2018-01-26 12:27 GMT+09:00 Bertrand Cherrier b.cherrier@micrologic.nc:
Dear SIG members,
The proposal "prop-123-v001: Modify 103/8 IPv4 transfer policy" has been sent to the Policy SIG for review.
It will be presented at the Open Policy Meeting at APNIC 45 in Kathmandu, Nepal on Tuesday, 27 February 2018.
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 proposal is available at:
http://www.apnic.net/policy/proposals/prop-123
Regards
Sumon, Bertrand, Ching-Heng APNIC Policy SIG Chairs
https://www.apnic.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/prop-123-v001.txt
prop-123-v001: Modify 103/8 IPv4 transfer policy
Proposer: Alex Yang yangpf6@126.com
- Problem statement
Policy Proposal prop-116-v006: Prohibit to transfer IPv4 addresses in the final /8 block reached consensus at the APNIC 44 AMM on 14 Sep 2017. Since that APNIC has stopped all the IPv4 transfers from 103/8 block if the delegation date is less than 5 years.
However, some of the 103/8 ranges were delegated before 14 Sep 2017. Those resources should not be subjected to 5 years restriction. The community was not aware of the restriction when they received those resources, some of the resources have been transferred or planning to transfer. If APNIC is not allow those transfers to be registered, there will be underground transfers. This will cause incorrect APNIC Whois data.
- Objective of policy change
To keep the APNIC Whois data correct.
- Situation in other regions
No such situation in other regions.
- Proposed policy solution
?Prohibit transfer IPv4 addresses under final /8 address block (103/8) which have not passed five years after its allocation/assignment? should only apply to those ranges were delegated from APNIC since 14 Sep 2017.
- Advantages / Disadvantages
Advantages:
- Allow APNIC to register those 103/8 transfers to keep the APNIC Whois data correct.
Disadvantages:
None.
- Impact on resource holders
Resource holders are allowed to transfer 103/8 ranges if the resources were delegated before 14 Sep 2017.
- References
sig-policy: APNIC SIG on resource management policy
sig-policy mailing list sig-policy@lists.apnic.net https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy
-------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.apnic.net/mailing-lists/sig-policy/attachments/20180129/533be3d9/attachment.html
------------------------------
Message: 2 Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2018 16:00:44 +0530 From: Ajai Kumar joinajay1@gmail.com To: Sanjeev Gupta sanjeev@dcs1.biz Cc: sig-policy sig-policy@apnic.net Subject: Re: [sig-policy] prop-123-v001: Modify 103/8 IPv4 transfer policy Message-ID: CAL41znM5ws5j+tu6f0StdxMzhQpT_mgFEJLONHABduTeWgnHqw@mail.gmail.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Dear All, For M&A cases, APNIC Secretariat has clear guidelines to handle it. I fully agree with Rajesh on it. Regards, Ajai Kumar
On 29 January 2018 at 12:04, Sanjeev Gupta sanjeev@dcs1.biz wrote:
Rajesh, the issue will be that the Secretariat has to be given a clear definition of "genuine". It is unfair to them to expect that they administer a rule which is not well defined.
Putting a date makes life clear (not better, but clear).
-- Sanjeev Gupta +65 98551208 <+65%209855%201208> http://sg.linkedin.com/in/ghane
On Mon, Jan 29, 2018 at 1:52 PM, Rajesh Panwala <rajesh@smartlinkindia.com
wrote:
I partially support the policy. For genuine M&A cases , there should not be any restriction on transfer of resources. M&A activities are part and parcel of routine business and no one knows when will it take place.
regards,
Rajesh Panwala For Smartlink Solutions Pvt. Ltd. +91-9227886001 <+91%2092278%2086001>
On Fri, Jan 26, 2018 at 8:57 AM, Bertrand Cherrier < b.cherrier@micrologic.nc> wrote:
Dear SIG members,
The proposal "prop-123-v001: Modify 103/8 IPv4 transfer policy" has been sent to the Policy SIG for review.
It will be presented at the Open Policy Meeting at APNIC 45 in Kathmandu, Nepal on Tuesday, 27 February 2018.
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 proposal is available at:
http://www.apnic.net/policy/proposals/prop-123
Regards
Sumon, Bertrand, Ching-Heng APNIC Policy SIG Chairs
https://www.apnic.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/prop-123-v001.txt
prop-123-v001: Modify 103/8 IPv4 transfer policy
Proposer: Alex Yang yangpf6@126.com
- Problem statement
Policy Proposal prop-116-v006: Prohibit to transfer IPv4 addresses in the final /8 block reached consensus at the APNIC 44 AMM on 14 Sep 2017. Since that APNIC has stopped all the IPv4 transfers from 103/8 block if the delegation date is less than 5 years.
However, some of the 103/8 ranges were delegated before 14 Sep 2017. Those resources should not be subjected to 5 years restriction. The community was not aware of the restriction when they received those resources, some of the resources have been transferred or planning to transfer. If APNIC is not allow those transfers to be registered, there will be underground transfers. This will cause incorrect APNIC Whois data.
- Objective of policy change
To keep the APNIC Whois data correct.
- Situation in other regions
No such situation in other regions.
- Proposed policy solution
?Prohibit transfer IPv4 addresses under final /8 address block (103/8) which have not passed five years after its allocation/assignment? should only apply to those ranges were delegated from APNIC since 14 Sep 2017.
- Advantages / Disadvantages
Advantages:
- Allow APNIC to register those 103/8 transfers to keep the APNIC Whois data correct.
Disadvantages:
None.
- Impact on resource holders
Resource holders are allowed to transfer 103/8 ranges if the resources were delegated before 14 Sep 2017.
- References
sig-policy: APNIC SIG on resource management policy
sig-policy mailing list sig-policy@lists.apnic.net https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy
sig-policy: APNIC SIG on resource management policy
sig-policy mailing list sig-policy@lists.apnic.net https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy
sig-policy: APNIC SIG on resource management policy
sig-policy mailing list sig-policy@lists.apnic.net https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy
Dear Alex
Thank you for your response.
In my opinion, any entity got the ipv4 blocks in 103/8 before 14 Sep 2017
should have the same right to use or transfer its blocks like others.
I also think that their rights should be respected. But,
Not only the "One-time" thing ,but a long term right , thank you very
much !!!
The recipient entities who are transferred 103/8 after 14 Sep 2017 know prop-116. I believe they have no right to transfer a 103/8 because they understand 5 years limitation and transferred it. So, I think the number of transfer of 103/8 before 14 Sep 2017 should be limited to one.
Would you please give us your opinion ?
BTW, About 60%+ 103/8 has already allocated. Therefore, the consensus of prop-123 means a substantial abolition of prop-116. We need re-think why prop-116 was consensus.
Thanks,
Satoru Tsurumaki
2018-01-29 20:09 GMT+09:00 yangpf6@126.com yangpf6@126.com:
Dear Satoru
Thank you for your question, and i mean it is really a goodquestion!
In my opinion, any entity got the ipv4 blocks in 103/8 before 14Sep 2017 should have the same right to use or transfer its blocks like others.
Not only the "One-time" thing ,but a long term right , thank youvery much !!!
Alex Yang
*From:* sig-policy-request sig-policy-request@lists.apnic.net *Date:* 2018-01-29 18:30 *To:* sig-policy sig-policy@lists.apnic.net *Subject:* sig-policy Digest, Vol 164, Issue 10 Send sig-policy mailing list submissions to sig-policy@lists.apnic.net
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to sig-policy-request@lists.apnic.net
You can reach the person managing the list at sig-policy-owner@lists.apnic.net
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of sig-policy digest..."
Today's Topics:
- Re: prop-123-v001: Modify 103/8 IPv4 transfer policy (Satoru Tsurumaki)
- Re: prop-123-v001: Modify 103/8 IPv4 transfer policy (Ajai Kumar)
Message: 1 Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2018 19:03:38 +0900 From: Satoru Tsurumaki satoru.tsurumaki@g.softbank.co.jp To: SIG policy sig-policy@apnic.net Subject: Re: [sig-policy] prop-123-v001: Modify 103/8 IPv4 transfer policy Message-ID: CAHXx+kQbpTnRduVLdTZKnyDhno0aqxHq4SbYxUqP8TMkq-VGzw@mail.gmail.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Dear Proposer
I would like to clarify.
My understanding is: Prop-116 will be subject to the 103/8 IPv4 address which allocated before 14 Sep 2017 and be transferred after this proposal will consensus. It's mean that these address will be allowed to transfer "ONE-TIME".
Is it correct ?
Regards,
Satoru Tsurumaki JPOPF Steering Team (former JPNIC Policy Working Group)
2018-01-26 12:27 GMT+09:00 Bertrand Cherrier b.cherrier@micrologic.nc:
Dear SIG members,
The proposal "prop-123-v001: Modify 103/8 IPv4 transfer policy" has been sent to the Policy SIG for review.
It will be presented at the Open Policy Meeting at APNIC 45 in Kathmandu, Nepal on Tuesday, 27 February 2018.
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 proposal is available at:
http://www.apnic.net/policy/proposals/prop-123
Regards
Sumon, Bertrand, Ching-Heng APNIC Policy SIG Chairs
https://www.apnic.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/prop-123-v001.txt
prop-123-v001: Modify 103/8 IPv4 transfer policy
Proposer: Alex Yang yangpf6@126.com
- Problem statement
Policy Proposal prop-116-v006: Prohibit to transfer IPv4 addresses in the final /8 block reached consensus at the APNIC 44 AMM on 14 Sep 2017. Since that APNIC has stopped all the IPv4 transfers from 103/8 block if the delegation date is less than 5 years.
However, some of the 103/8 ranges were delegated before 14 Sep 2017. Those resources should not be subjected to 5 years restriction. The community was not aware of the restriction when they received those resources, some of the resources have been transferred or planning to transfer. If APNIC is not allow those transfers to be registered, there will be underground transfers. This will cause incorrect APNIC Whois data.
- Objective of policy change
To keep the APNIC Whois data correct.
- Situation in other regions
No such situation in other regions.
- Proposed policy solution
?Prohibit transfer IPv4 addresses under final /8 address block (103/8) which have not passed five years after its allocation/assignment? should only apply to those ranges were delegated from APNIC since 14 Sep 2017.
- Advantages / Disadvantages
Advantages:
- Allow APNIC to register those 103/8 transfers to keep the APNIC Whois data correct.
Disadvantages:
None.
- Impact on resource holders
Resource holders are allowed to transfer 103/8 ranges if the resources were delegated before 14 Sep 2017.
- References
sig-policy: APNIC SIG on resource management policy
sig-policy mailing list sig-policy@lists.apnic.net https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy
Dear Satoru
Thank you for your understanding , and for the second problem : Not only the "One-time" thing ,but a long term right !!!
My suggestion is :
M&A is ineluctable , and NO one know when it will happen from what entities , and even one company may have more than one M&A
So my proposal is for the IPv4 Blocks allocated before prop-116 , and for the M&A situation, should have the equal right with others (Not only one-time)
Other IPv4 blocks allocated after prop-116 or other situation should strictly obey the policy . Sorry maybe there were some mistakes for my explaination last time.
Alex Yang
From: Satoru Tsurumaki Date: 2018-01-31 09:49 To: yangpf6@126.com; sig-policy Subject: Re: [sig-policy] sig-policy Digest, Vol 164, Issue 10 Dear Alex
Thank you for your response.
In my opinion, any entity got the ipv4 blocks in 103/8 before 14 Sep 2017 should have the same right to use or transfer its blocks like others.
I also think that their rights should be respected. But,
Not only the "One-time" thing ,but a long term right , thank you very much !!!
The recipient entities who are transferred 103/8 after 14 Sep 2017 know prop-116. I believe they have no right to transfer a 103/8 because they understand 5 years limitation and transferred it. So, I think the number of transfer of 103/8 before 14 Sep 2017 should be limited to one.
Would you please give us your opinion ?
BTW, About 60%+ 103/8 has already allocated. Therefore, the consensus of prop-123 means a substantial abolition of prop-116. We need re-think why prop-116 was consensus.
Thanks,
Satoru Tsurumaki
2018-01-29 20:09 GMT+09:00 yangpf6@126.com yangpf6@126.com: Dear Satoru
Thank you for your question, and i mean it is really a good question!
In my opinion, any entity got the ipv4 blocks in 103/8 before 14 Sep 2017 should have the same right to use or transfer its blocks like others.
Not only the "One-time" thing ,but a long term right , thank you very much !!!
Alex Yang
From: sig-policy-request Date: 2018-01-29 18:30 To: sig-policy Subject: sig-policy Digest, Vol 164, Issue 10 Send sig-policy mailing list submissions to sig-policy@lists.apnic.net
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to sig-policy-request@lists.apnic.net
You can reach the person managing the list at sig-policy-owner@lists.apnic.net
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of sig-policy digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. Re: prop-123-v001: Modify 103/8 IPv4 transfer policy (Satoru Tsurumaki) 2. Re: prop-123-v001: Modify 103/8 IPv4 transfer policy (Ajai Kumar)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1 Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2018 19:03:38 +0900 From: Satoru Tsurumaki satoru.tsurumaki@g.softbank.co.jp To: SIG policy sig-policy@apnic.net Subject: Re: [sig-policy] prop-123-v001: Modify 103/8 IPv4 transfer policy Message-ID: CAHXx+kQbpTnRduVLdTZKnyDhno0aqxHq4SbYxUqP8TMkq-VGzw@mail.gmail.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Dear Proposer
I would like to clarify.
My understanding is: Prop-116 will be subject to the 103/8 IPv4 address which allocated before 14 Sep 2017 and be transferred after this proposal will consensus. It's mean that these address will be allowed to transfer "ONE-TIME".
Is it correct ?
Regards,
Satoru Tsurumaki JPOPF Steering Team (former JPNIC Policy Working Group)
2018-01-26 12:27 GMT+09:00 Bertrand Cherrier b.cherrier@micrologic.nc:
Dear SIG members,
The proposal "prop-123-v001: Modify 103/8 IPv4 transfer policy" has been sent to the Policy SIG for review.
It will be presented at the Open Policy Meeting at APNIC 45 in Kathmandu, Nepal on Tuesday, 27 February 2018.
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 proposal is available at:
http://www.apnic.net/policy/proposals/prop-123
Regards
Sumon, Bertrand, Ching-Heng APNIC Policy SIG Chairs
https://www.apnic.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/prop-123-v001.txt
prop-123-v001: Modify 103/8 IPv4 transfer policy
Proposer: Alex Yang yangpf6@126.com
- Problem statement
Policy Proposal prop-116-v006: Prohibit to transfer IPv4 addresses in the final /8 block reached consensus at the APNIC 44 AMM on 14 Sep 2017. Since that APNIC has stopped all the IPv4 transfers from 103/8 block if the delegation date is less than 5 years.
However, some of the 103/8 ranges were delegated before 14 Sep 2017. Those resources should not be subjected to 5 years restriction. The community was not aware of the restriction when they received those resources, some of the resources have been transferred or planning to transfer. If APNIC is not allow those transfers to be registered, there will be underground transfers. This will cause incorrect APNIC Whois data.
- Objective of policy change
To keep the APNIC Whois data correct.
- Situation in other regions
No such situation in other regions.
- Proposed policy solution
?Prohibit transfer IPv4 addresses under final /8 address block (103/8) which have not passed five years after its allocation/assignment? should only apply to those ranges were delegated from APNIC since 14 Sep 2017.
- Advantages / Disadvantages
Advantages:
- Allow APNIC to register those 103/8 transfers to keep the APNIC Whois data correct.
Disadvantages:
None.
- Impact on resource holders
Resource holders are allowed to transfer 103/8 ranges if the resources were delegated before 14 Sep 2017.
- References
sig-policy: APNIC SIG on resource management policy
sig-policy mailing list sig-policy@lists.apnic.net https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy
-------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.apnic.net/mailing-lists/sig-policy/attachments/20180129/533be3d9/attachment.html
------------------------------
Message: 2 Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2018 16:00:44 +0530 From: Ajai Kumar joinajay1@gmail.com To: Sanjeev Gupta sanjeev@dcs1.biz Cc: sig-policy sig-policy@apnic.net Subject: Re: [sig-policy] prop-123-v001: Modify 103/8 IPv4 transfer policy Message-ID: CAL41znM5ws5j+tu6f0StdxMzhQpT_mgFEJLONHABduTeWgnHqw@mail.gmail.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Dear All, For M&A cases, APNIC Secretariat has clear guidelines to handle it. I fully agree with Rajesh on it. Regards, Ajai Kumar
On 29 January 2018 at 12:04, Sanjeev Gupta sanjeev@dcs1.biz wrote:
Rajesh, the issue will be that the Secretariat has to be given a clear definition of "genuine". It is unfair to them to expect that they administer a rule which is not well defined.
Putting a date makes life clear (not better, but clear).
-- Sanjeev Gupta +65 98551208 <+65%209855%201208> http://sg.linkedin.com/in/ghane
On Mon, Jan 29, 2018 at 1:52 PM, Rajesh Panwala <rajesh@smartlinkindia.com
wrote:
I partially support the policy. For genuine M&A cases , there should not be any restriction on transfer of resources. M&A activities are part and parcel of routine business and no one knows when will it take place.
regards,
Rajesh Panwala For Smartlink Solutions Pvt. Ltd. +91-9227886001 <+91%2092278%2086001>
On Fri, Jan 26, 2018 at 8:57 AM, Bertrand Cherrier < b.cherrier@micrologic.nc> wrote:
Dear SIG members,
The proposal "prop-123-v001: Modify 103/8 IPv4 transfer policy" has been sent to the Policy SIG for review.
It will be presented at the Open Policy Meeting at APNIC 45 in Kathmandu, Nepal on Tuesday, 27 February 2018.
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 proposal is available at:
http://www.apnic.net/policy/proposals/prop-123
Regards
Sumon, Bertrand, Ching-Heng APNIC Policy SIG Chairs
https://www.apnic.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/prop-123-v001.txt
prop-123-v001: Modify 103/8 IPv4 transfer policy
Proposer: Alex Yang yangpf6@126.com
- Problem statement
Policy Proposal prop-116-v006: Prohibit to transfer IPv4 addresses in the final /8 block reached consensus at the APNIC 44 AMM on 14 Sep 2017. Since that APNIC has stopped all the IPv4 transfers from 103/8 block if the delegation date is less than 5 years.
However, some of the 103/8 ranges were delegated before 14 Sep 2017. Those resources should not be subjected to 5 years restriction. The community was not aware of the restriction when they received those resources, some of the resources have been transferred or planning to transfer. If APNIC is not allow those transfers to be registered, there will be underground transfers. This will cause incorrect APNIC Whois data.
- Objective of policy change
To keep the APNIC Whois data correct.
- Situation in other regions
No such situation in other regions.
- Proposed policy solution
?Prohibit transfer IPv4 addresses under final /8 address block (103/8) which have not passed five years after its allocation/assignment? should only apply to those ranges were delegated from APNIC since 14 Sep 2017.
- Advantages / Disadvantages
Advantages:
- Allow APNIC to register those 103/8 transfers to keep the APNIC Whois data correct.
Disadvantages:
None.
- Impact on resource holders
Resource holders are allowed to transfer 103/8 ranges if the resources were delegated before 14 Sep 2017.
- References
sig-policy: APNIC SIG on resource management policy
sig-policy mailing list sig-policy@lists.apnic.net https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy
sig-policy: APNIC SIG on resource management policy
sig-policy mailing list sig-policy@lists.apnic.net https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy
sig-policy: APNIC SIG on resource management policy
sig-policy mailing list sig-policy@lists.apnic.net https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy
Dear Alex
Thank you for your clarification ! I understand this policy and personally support it.
Satoru
2018-01-31 19:09 GMT+09:00 yangpf6@126.com yangpf6@126.com:
Dear Satoru
Thank you for your understanding , and for the second problem : Notonly the "One-time" thing ,but a long term right !!!
My suggestion is : M&A is ineluctable , and NO one know when it will happen from whatentities , and even one company may have more than one M&A
So my proposal is for the IPv4 Blocks allocated before prop-116 , andfor the M&A situation, should have the equal right with others (Not only one-time)
Other IPv4 blocks allocated after prop-116 or other situation shouldstrictly obey the policy . Sorry maybe there were some mistakes for my explaination last time.
Alex Yang
From: Satoru Tsurumaki Date: 2018-01-31 09:49 To: yangpf6@126.com; sig-policy Subject: Re: [sig-policy] sig-policy Digest, Vol 164, Issue 10 Dear Alex
Thank you for your response.
In my opinion, any entity got the ipv4 blocks in 103/8 before 14 Sep 2017 should have the same right to use or transfer its blocks like others.
I also think that their rights should be respected. But,
Not only the "One-time" thing ,but a long term right , thank you very much !!!
The recipient entities who are transferred 103/8 after 14 Sep 2017 know prop-116. I believe they have no right to transfer a 103/8 because they understand 5 years limitation and transferred it. So, I think the number of transfer of 103/8 before 14 Sep 2017 should be limited to one.
Would you please give us your opinion ?
BTW, About 60%+ 103/8 has already allocated. Therefore, the consensus of prop-123 means a substantial abolition of prop-116. We need re-think why prop-116 was consensus.
Thanks,
Satoru Tsurumaki
2018-01-29 20:09 GMT+09:00 yangpf6@126.com yangpf6@126.com:
Dear Satoru
Thank you for your question, and i mean it is really a goodquestion!
In my opinion, any entity got the ipv4 blocks in 103/8 before 14Sep 2017 should have the same right to use or transfer its blocks like others.
Not only the "One-time" thing ,but a long term right , thank youvery much !!!
Alex Yang
From: sig-policy-request Date: 2018-01-29 18:30 To: sig-policy Subject: sig-policy Digest, Vol 164, Issue 10 Send sig-policy mailing list submissions to sig-policy@lists.apnic.net
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to sig-policy-request@lists.apnic.net
You can reach the person managing the list at sig-policy-owner@lists.apnic.net
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of sig-policy digest..."
Today's Topics:
- Re: prop-123-v001: Modify 103/8 IPv4 transfer policy (Satoru Tsurumaki)
- Re: prop-123-v001: Modify 103/8 IPv4 transfer policy (Ajai Kumar)
Message: 1 Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2018 19:03:38 +0900 From: Satoru Tsurumaki satoru.tsurumaki@g.softbank.co.jp To: SIG policy sig-policy@apnic.net Subject: Re: [sig-policy] prop-123-v001: Modify 103/8 IPv4 transfer policy Message-ID: CAHXx+kQbpTnRduVLdTZKnyDhno0aqxHq4SbYxUqP8TMkq-VGzw@mail.gmail.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Dear Proposer
I would like to clarify.
My understanding is: Prop-116 will be subject to the 103/8 IPv4 address which allocated before 14 Sep 2017 and be transferred after this proposal will consensus. It's mean that these address will be allowed to transfer "ONE-TIME".
Is it correct ?
Regards,
Satoru Tsurumaki JPOPF Steering Team (former JPNIC Policy Working Group)
2018-01-26 12:27 GMT+09:00 Bertrand Cherrier b.cherrier@micrologic.nc:
Dear SIG members,
The proposal "prop-123-v001: Modify 103/8 IPv4 transfer policy" has been sent to the Policy SIG for review.
It will be presented at the Open Policy Meeting at APNIC 45 in Kathmandu, Nepal on Tuesday, 27 February 2018.
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 proposal is available at:
http://www.apnic.net/policy/proposals/prop-123
Regards
Sumon, Bertrand, Ching-Heng APNIC Policy SIG Chairs
https://www.apnic.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/prop-123-v001.txt
prop-123-v001: Modify 103/8 IPv4 transfer policy
Proposer: Alex Yang yangpf6@126.com
- Problem statement
Policy Proposal prop-116-v006: Prohibit to transfer IPv4 addresses in the final /8 block reached consensus at the APNIC 44 AMM on 14 Sep 2017. Since that APNIC has stopped all the IPv4 transfers from 103/8 block if the delegation date is less than 5 years.
However, some of the 103/8 ranges were delegated before 14 Sep 2017. Those resources should not be subjected to 5 years restriction. The community was not aware of the restriction when they received those resources, some of the resources have been transferred or planning to transfer. If APNIC is not allow those transfers to be registered, there will be underground transfers. This will cause incorrect APNIC Whois data.
- Objective of policy change
To keep the APNIC Whois data correct.
- Situation in other regions
No such situation in other regions.
- Proposed policy solution
?Prohibit transfer IPv4 addresses under final /8 address block (103/8) which have not passed five years after its allocation/assignment? should only apply to those ranges were delegated from APNIC since 14 Sep 2017.
- Advantages / Disadvantages
Advantages:
- Allow APNIC to register those 103/8 transfers to keep the APNIC Whois data correct.
Disadvantages:
None.
- Impact on resource holders
Resource holders are allowed to transfer 103/8 ranges if the resources were delegated before 14 Sep 2017.
- References
sig-policy: APNIC SIG on resource management policy
sig-policy mailing list sig-policy@lists.apnic.net https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy
Dear Satoru
Thanks for your supporting.
Alex Yang
From: Tsurumaki, Satoru Date: 2018-02-01 11:10 To: yangpf6@126.com CC: Satoru Tsurumaki; sig-policy Subject: Re: [sig-policy] sig-policy Digest, Vol 164, Issue 10 Dear Alex
Thank you for your clarification ! I understand this policy and personally support it.
Satoru
2018-01-31 19:09 GMT+09:00 yangpf6@126.com yangpf6@126.com:
Dear Satoru
Thank you for your understanding , and for the second problem : Notonly the "One-time" thing ,but a long term right !!!
My suggestion is : M&A is ineluctable , and NO one know when it will happen from whatentities , and even one company may have more than one M&A
So my proposal is for the IPv4 Blocks allocated before prop-116 , andfor the M&A situation, should have the equal right with others (Not only one-time)
Other IPv4 blocks allocated after prop-116 or other situation shouldstrictly obey the policy . Sorry maybe there were some mistakes for my explaination last time.
Alex Yang
From: Satoru Tsurumaki Date: 2018-01-31 09:49 To: yangpf6@126.com; sig-policy Subject: Re: [sig-policy] sig-policy Digest, Vol 164, Issue 10 Dear Alex
Thank you for your response.
In my opinion, any entity got the ipv4 blocks in 103/8 before 14 Sep 2017 should have the same right to use or transfer its blocks like others.
I also think that their rights should be respected. But,
Not only the "One-time" thing ,but a long term right , thank you very much !!!
The recipient entities who are transferred 103/8 after 14 Sep 2017 know prop-116. I believe they have no right to transfer a 103/8 because they understand 5 years limitation and transferred it. So, I think the number of transfer of 103/8 before 14 Sep 2017 should be limited to one.
Would you please give us your opinion ?
BTW, About 60%+ 103/8 has already allocated. Therefore, the consensus of prop-123 means a substantial abolition of prop-116. We need re-think why prop-116 was consensus.
Thanks,
Satoru Tsurumaki
2018-01-29 20:09 GMT+09:00 yangpf6@126.com yangpf6@126.com:
Dear Satoru
Thank you for your question, and i mean it is really a goodquestion!
In my opinion, any entity got the ipv4 blocks in 103/8 before 14Sep 2017 should have the same right to use or transfer its blocks like others.
Not only the "One-time" thing ,but a long term right , thank youvery much !!!
Alex Yang
From: sig-policy-request Date: 2018-01-29 18:30 To: sig-policy Subject: sig-policy Digest, Vol 164, Issue 10 Send sig-policy mailing list submissions to sig-policy@lists.apnic.net
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to sig-policy-request@lists.apnic.net
You can reach the person managing the list at sig-policy-owner@lists.apnic.net
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of sig-policy digest..."
Today's Topics:
- Re: prop-123-v001: Modify 103/8 IPv4 transfer policy (Satoru Tsurumaki)
- Re: prop-123-v001: Modify 103/8 IPv4 transfer policy (Ajai Kumar)
Message: 1 Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2018 19:03:38 +0900 From: Satoru Tsurumaki satoru.tsurumaki@g.softbank.co.jp To: SIG policy sig-policy@apnic.net Subject: Re: [sig-policy] prop-123-v001: Modify 103/8 IPv4 transfer policy Message-ID: CAHXx+kQbpTnRduVLdTZKnyDhno0aqxHq4SbYxUqP8TMkq-VGzw@mail.gmail.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Dear Proposer
I would like to clarify.
My understanding is: Prop-116 will be subject to the 103/8 IPv4 address which allocated before 14 Sep 2017 and be transferred after this proposal will consensus. It's mean that these address will be allowed to transfer "ONE-TIME".
Is it correct ?
Regards,
Satoru Tsurumaki JPOPF Steering Team (former JPNIC Policy Working Group)
2018-01-26 12:27 GMT+09:00 Bertrand Cherrier b.cherrier@micrologic.nc:
Dear SIG members,
The proposal "prop-123-v001: Modify 103/8 IPv4 transfer policy" has been sent to the Policy SIG for review.
It will be presented at the Open Policy Meeting at APNIC 45 in Kathmandu, Nepal on Tuesday, 27 February 2018.
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 proposal is available at:
http://www.apnic.net/policy/proposals/prop-123
Regards
Sumon, Bertrand, Ching-Heng APNIC Policy SIG Chairs
https://www.apnic.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/prop-123-v001.txt
prop-123-v001: Modify 103/8 IPv4 transfer policy
Proposer: Alex Yang yangpf6@126.com
- Problem statement
Policy Proposal prop-116-v006: Prohibit to transfer IPv4 addresses in the final /8 block reached consensus at the APNIC 44 AMM on 14 Sep 2017. Since that APNIC has stopped all the IPv4 transfers from 103/8 block if the delegation date is less than 5 years.
However, some of the 103/8 ranges were delegated before 14 Sep 2017. Those resources should not be subjected to 5 years restriction. The community was not aware of the restriction when they received those resources, some of the resources have been transferred or planning to transfer. If APNIC is not allow those transfers to be registered, there will be underground transfers. This will cause incorrect APNIC Whois data.
- Objective of policy change
To keep the APNIC Whois data correct.
- Situation in other regions
No such situation in other regions.
- Proposed policy solution
?Prohibit transfer IPv4 addresses under final /8 address block (103/8) which have not passed five years after its allocation/assignment? should only apply to those ranges were delegated from APNIC since 14 Sep 2017.
- Advantages / Disadvantages
Advantages:
- Allow APNIC to register those 103/8 transfers to keep the APNIC Whois data correct.
Disadvantages:
None.
- Impact on resource holders
Resource holders are allowed to transfer 103/8 ranges if the resources were delegated before 14 Sep 2017.
- References
sig-policy: APNIC SIG on resource management policy
sig-policy mailing list sig-policy@lists.apnic.net https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy
-------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.apnic.net/mailing-lists/sig-policy/attachments/20180129/533be3d9/attachment.html
Message: 2 Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2018 16:00:44 +0530 From: Ajai Kumar joinajay1@gmail.com To: Sanjeev Gupta sanjeev@dcs1.biz Cc: sig-policy sig-policy@apnic.net Subject: Re: [sig-policy] prop-123-v001: Modify 103/8 IPv4 transfer policy Message-ID: CAL41znM5ws5j+tu6f0StdxMzhQpT_mgFEJLONHABduTeWgnHqw@mail.gmail.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Dear All, For M&A cases, APNIC Secretariat has clear guidelines to handle it. I fully agree with Rajesh on it. Regards, Ajai Kumar
On 29 January 2018 at 12:04, Sanjeev Gupta sanjeev@dcs1.biz wrote:
Rajesh, the issue will be that the Secretariat has to be given a clear definition of "genuine". It is unfair to them to expect that they administer a rule which is not well defined.
Putting a date makes life clear (not better, but clear).
-- Sanjeev Gupta +65 98551208 <+65%209855%201208> http://sg.linkedin.com/in/ghane
On Mon, Jan 29, 2018 at 1:52 PM, Rajesh Panwala <rajesh@smartlinkindia.com
wrote:
I partially support the policy. For genuine M&A cases , there should not be any restriction on transfer of resources. M&A activities are part and parcel of routine business and no one knows when will it take place.
regards,
Rajesh Panwala For Smartlink Solutions Pvt. Ltd. +91-9227886001 <+91%2092278%2086001>
On Fri, Jan 26, 2018 at 8:57 AM, Bertrand Cherrier < b.cherrier@micrologic.nc> wrote:
Dear SIG members,
The proposal "prop-123-v001: Modify 103/8 IPv4 transfer policy" has been sent to the Policy SIG for review.
It will be presented at the Open Policy Meeting at APNIC 45 in Kathmandu, Nepal on Tuesday, 27 February 2018.
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 proposal is available at:
http://www.apnic.net/policy/proposals/prop-123
Regards
Sumon, Bertrand, Ching-Heng APNIC Policy SIG Chairs
https://www.apnic.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/prop-123-v001.txt
prop-123-v001: Modify 103/8 IPv4 transfer policy
Proposer: Alex Yang yangpf6@126.com
- Problem statement
Policy Proposal prop-116-v006: Prohibit to transfer IPv4 addresses in the final /8 block reached consensus at the APNIC 44 AMM on 14 Sep 2017. Since that APNIC has stopped all the IPv4 transfers from 103/8 block if the delegation date is less than 5 years.
However, some of the 103/8 ranges were delegated before 14 Sep 2017. Those resources should not be subjected to 5 years restriction. The community was not aware of the restriction when they received those resources, some of the resources have been transferred or planning to transfer. If APNIC is not allow those transfers to be registered, there will be underground transfers. This will cause incorrect APNIC Whois data.
- Objective of policy change
To keep the APNIC Whois data correct.
- Situation in other regions
No such situation in other regions.
- Proposed policy solution
?Prohibit transfer IPv4 addresses under final /8 address block (103/8) which have not passed five years after its allocation/assignment? should only apply to those ranges were delegated from APNIC since 14 Sep 2017.
- Advantages / Disadvantages
Advantages:
- Allow APNIC to register those 103/8 transfers to keep the APNIC Whois data correct.
Disadvantages:
None.
- Impact on resource holders
Resource holders are allowed to transfer 103/8 ranges if the resources were delegated before 14 Sep 2017.
- References
sig-policy: APNIC SIG on resource management policy
sig-policy mailing list sig-policy@lists.apnic.net https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy
sig-policy: APNIC SIG on resource management policy
sig-policy mailing list sig-policy@lists.apnic.net https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy
sig-policy: APNIC SIG on resource management policy
sig-policy mailing list sig-policy@lists.apnic.net https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy
--
(M) +91-9868477444 Skype ID:erajay P-mail: joinajay1 at gmail.com ................................. Please don't print this email unless you really need to. This will preserve trees on our planet. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.apnic.net/mailing-lists/sig-policy/attachments/20180129/68ae089f/attachment.html
sig-policy mailing list sig-policy@lists.apnic.net https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy
End of sig-policy Digest, Vol 164, Issue 10
sig-policy: APNIC SIG on resource management policy
sig-policy mailing list sig-policy@lists.apnic.net https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy
sig-policy: APNIC SIG on resource management policy
sig-policy mailing list sig-policy@lists.apnic.net https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy
Activity Summary
- 2069 days inactive
- 2069 days old
- sig-policy@lists.apnic.net
- 3 participants
- 4 comments