Re: [sig-policy] prop-050-v002: IPv4 address transfers
Hi Geoff,
On 23 Jan 2008, at 10:21, Geoff Huston wrote:
[...]
APNIC will process IPv4 address transfer requests following the
adoption of this proposed policy, subject to the following
conditions:
Conditions on the IPv4 address block:
- Only IPv4 address blocks equal to, or larger than, a /24 prefix
may be transferred.
I think it would be clearer to refer to prefix length or block
size but not both.
could you please suggest some alternative wording here? I must admit
that I use these terms interchangeably, so I know what I'm talking
about (! :-)) but I can see the potential for confusion here. Is
there a way that you can suggest to make this clearer?
How about:
- Only IPv4 prefixes of /24 or shorter may be transferred.
[...]
- The source entity will be ineligible to receive any further
IPv4
address allocations or assignments from APNIC for a period of
24
months after the transfer.
The meaning of this paragraph depends on whether address transfers
go directly from member to member or go via APNIC. I am not sure
which is the case but if transfers are direct and do not go via
APNIC it would seem that an APNIC member that transferred
resources away could go on to receive additional resources from
another member but not from APNIC within 24 months. Could you
please clarify whether transfers need to go via APNIC?
Hmmm - I know what I meant to say, but it appears that I have not
said it clearly. Let me try to rephrase this, and see if the
rephrasing makes the policy proposal clear, or whether you see a
need to reword this to make the intent clearer.
I think I would phrase it like this.
- An APNIC member that has been the source of a resource transfer
may not receive IPv4 resources direct from APNIC or from an APNIC
member for 24 months after the completion of the transfer.
Does my phrasing capture your intended meaning?
Can you please explain why you chose 24 months as the length of time a
member may not receive IPv4 resources once they have transferred
resources away? Why is it more suitable than a shorter or longer
period? Also, is it still appropriate if APNIC's stock of unallocated
IPv4 address space is emptied within the 24 month period?
Many thanks,
Leo