Activity Summary
- 4962 days inactive
- 4962 days old
- sig-policy@lists.apnic.net
- 2 participants
- 1 comments
j
: Next unread message k
: Previous unread message j a
: Jump to all threads
j l
: Jump to MailingList overview
Disclaimer: the comments below reflect the views of the proposal authors and have NO link to co-chair's opinion about this proposal -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Critical infrastructure/IXP/Multihoming applicants may not be able to justify a /22 requirement, currently half of the assignments made in AP region is /24, besides that, the criterias for allocations and assignments are some how different.
We currently allow allocations and assignments, but prop-062 only allow allocations.
We are not trying to fulfil every needs, just try to be fair and consistent.
Regards
Terence CNNIC
----- Original Message ----- From: "Randy Bush" randy@psg.com To: "Izumi Okutani" izumi@nic.ad.jp Cc: sig-policy@lists.apnic.net Sent: Tuesday, February 23, 2010 9:52 PM Subject: Re: [sig-policy] prop-081: Eligibility for assignments fromthe final /8
< chair hat = off >
I think it could be possible that there will be needs for these assignments if there is a new gTLD/ccTLD set up as critical infrastructure, and we could also have new IXPs or multi-homed networks. We constantly make 3-4 assignments/year for these use within JP.
ixps, multi-homed networks, etc. are precisely the users expected for prop-062. so why is the final /8 olicy not satisfactory for them all of a sudden?
let us remember, we will be out of ipv4 space. we will simply not be able to fulfil every need.
randy
sig-policy: APNIC SIG on resource management policy *
sig-policy mailing list sig-policy@lists.apnic.net http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
Terence Zhang YH(CNNIC) wrote:
Disclaimer: the comments below reflect the views of the proposal authors and have NO link to co-chair's opinion about this proposal
Critical infrastructure/IXP/Multihoming applicants may not be able to justify a /22 requirement, currently half of the assignments made in AP region is /24, besides that, the criterias for allocations and assignments are some how different.
We currently allow allocations and assignments, but prop-062 only allow allocations.
We are not trying to fulfil every needs, just try to be fair and consistent.
Fairness is a good idea, but you are looking at specific needs. The current final /8 policy to me seems the most fair.
IMHO consistency ends when that last /8 is handed to RIRs. No more IPv4. nada.
Regards, Seiichi
Regards
Terence CNNIC
----- Original Message ----- From: "Randy Bush" randy@psg.com To: "Izumi Okutani" izumi@nic.ad.jp Cc: sig-policy@lists.apnic.net Sent: Tuesday, February 23, 2010 9:52 PM Subject: Re: [sig-policy] prop-081: Eligibility for assignments fromthe final /8
< chair hat = off >
I think it could be possible that there will be needs for these assignments if there is a new gTLD/ccTLD set up as critical infrastructure, and we could also have new IXPs or multi-homed networks. We constantly make 3-4 assignments/year for these use within JP.
ixps, multi-homed networks, etc. are precisely the users expected for prop-062. so why is the final /8 olicy not satisfactory for them all of a sudden?
let us remember, we will be out of ipv4 space. we will simply not be able to fulfil every need.
randy
sig-policy: APNIC SIG on resource management policy *
sig-policy mailing list sig-policy@lists.apnic.net http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy
sig-policy: APNIC SIG on resource management policy *
sig-policy mailing list sig-policy@lists.apnic.net http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy