Keyboard Shortcuts
Thread View
j
: Next unread messagek
: Previous unread messagej a
: Jump to all threadsj l
: Jump to MailingList overview

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@syce.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@apnic.net https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy-chair
Attachments:
- 00.txt (text/plain — 4.8 KB)

Hi Tomohiro and All,
While I support the rational of this proposal, I would like to suggest excluding M&A transfer from the scope and allowing it as it is. I don't think v4 space allocated from final /8 to the company which is a target of M&A would become a deal breaker of "real" M&A. Rather, people who work for that M&A will not find this policy or just ignore it, then the company will be acquired, but the space cannot be transferred, and whois data will not be updated. I know that somebody may use M&A transfer with different intension, but I think it is "collateral".
Regards, Matt
2017-08-08 23:12 GMT-07:00 chku chku@twnic.net.tw:
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@syce.net
- 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:
- 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 | +------+-----------+------------+-
- 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
- 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.
- Situation in other regions
None.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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)
- References
Sig-policy-chair mailing list Sig-policy-chair@apnic.net https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy-chair
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

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@lists.apnic.net [mailto:sig-policy-bounces@lists.apnic.net] De la part de chku Envoyé : mercredi 9 août 2017 17:12 À : sig-policy sig-policy@apnic.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@syce.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@apnic.net https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy-chair

Dear Tomohiro,
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@apnic.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@lists.apnic.net on behalf of Stephane MATEO" <sig-policy-bounces@lists.apnic.net on behalf of Stephane.Mateo@offratel.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@lists.apnic.net [mailto:sig-policy-bounces@lists.apnic.net] De la part de chku Envoyé : mercredi 9 août 2017 17:12 À : sig-policy sig-policy@apnic.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@syce.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@apnic.net https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy-chair * 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 Colleagues,
I am Satoru Tsurumaki from Policy Working Group in Japan.
I would like to share key feedback in our community for prop-116, based on a meeting we organised on 5th Sep to discuss these proposals.
Substantial support expressed for the proposal with reasons below.
* Transfer of 103/8 block is against the original intention of the final /8 policy (103/8).
* Given the purpose of 103/8 block distribution is to make the minimum IPv4 address block available until transition to IPv6, it may even be unnecessary to set the limit of "two years" to prohibit the transfer.
Best Regards,
Satoru Tsurumaki Policy Working Group Japan Open Policy Forum
2017-08-09 15:12 GMT+09:00 chku chku@twnic.net.tw:
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@syce.net
- 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:
- 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 | +------+-----------+------------+-
- 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
- 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.
- Situation in other regions
None.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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)
- References
Sig-policy-chair mailing list Sig-policy-chair@apnic.net https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy-chair
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 Policy chair, I personally partial support if M& A case be excluded as no one knows when M&A case can come into picture looking at the business of company. Regards, Ajai Kumar
On 8 September 2017 at 14:31, Satoru Tsurumaki < satoru.tsurumaki@g.softbank.co.jp> wrote:
Dear Colleagues,
I am Satoru Tsurumaki from Policy Working Group in Japan.
I would like to share key feedback in our community for prop-116, based on a meeting we organised on 5th Sep to discuss these proposals.
Substantial support expressed for the proposal with reasons below.
- Transfer of 103/8 block is against the original intention of the
final /8 policy (103/8).
- Given the purpose of 103/8 block distribution is to make the minimum
IPv4 address block available until transition to IPv6, it may even be unnecessary to set the limit of "two years" to prohibit the transfer.
Best Regards,
Satoru Tsurumaki Policy Working Group Japan Open Policy Forum
2017-08-09 15:12 GMT+09:00 chku chku@twnic.net.tw:
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@syce.net
- 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:
- 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 | +------+-----------+------------+-
- 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
- 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.
- Situation in other regions
None.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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)
- References
Sig-policy-chair mailing list Sig-policy-chair@apnic.net https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy-chair
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 Team,
I also support Mr. Ajay. For M&A one can't predict. Policy should accomodate M&A cases.
Rajesh Panwala
On 12-Sep-2017 10:04 AM, "Ajai Kumar" joinajay1@gmail.com wrote:
Dear Policy chair, I personally partial support if M& A case be excluded as no one knows when M&A case can come into picture looking at the business of company. Regards, Ajai Kumar
On 8 September 2017 at 14:31, Satoru Tsurumaki < satoru.tsurumaki@g.softbank.co.jp> wrote:
Dear Colleagues,
I am Satoru Tsurumaki from Policy Working Group in Japan.
I would like to share key feedback in our community for prop-116, based on a meeting we organised on 5th Sep to discuss these proposals.
Substantial support expressed for the proposal with reasons below.
- Transfer of 103/8 block is against the original intention of the
final /8 policy (103/8).
- Given the purpose of 103/8 block distribution is to make the minimum
IPv4 address block available until transition to IPv6, it may even be unnecessary to set the limit of "two years" to prohibit the transfer.
Best Regards,
Satoru Tsurumaki Policy Working Group Japan Open Policy Forum
2017-08-09 15:12 GMT+09:00 chku chku@twnic.net.tw:
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@syce.net
- 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:
- 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 | +------+-----------+------------+-
- 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
- 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.
- Situation in other regions
None.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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)
- References
Sig-policy-chair mailing list Sig-policy-chair@apnic.net https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy-chair
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.
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

I again put my support this proposal as i have done before .
*Regards / Jahangir *
On Wed, Aug 9, 2017 at 12:12 PM, chku chku@twnic.net.tw wrote:
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@syce.net
- 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:
- 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 | +------+-----------+------------+-
- 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
- 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.
- Situation in other regions
None.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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)
- References
Sig-policy-chair mailing list Sig-policy-chair@apnic.net https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy-chair
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
- 2205 days inactive
- 2205 days old
- sig-policy@lists.apnic.net
- 8 participants
- 7 comments