David Woodgate said the following on 15/7/08 14:01:
But at APNIC 25, prop-058 was abandoned principally on the basis that the resources allocated by IANA to APNIC must be assigned to end users for public Internet purposes to meet the terms of agreement between IANA and APNIC, and that that did not allow for reservation of resources by APNIC for non-Internet or shared regional use.
prop-58 was asking for at least one /8 out of what was approx 40 /8s remaining. Deep impact. Out of the 40 /8s, APNIC would probably only receive around 12. So donating one twelfth of APNIC's remaining potential IPv4 address space to satisfy the needs of a few of the largest ISPs around the world (not just APNIC members) seems charitable beyond all levels of charity I've ever come across in this industry.
4 ASNs out of a pool of slightly less than 4 thousand million is not so much an impact. Same as one /32 out of 4 thousand million /32s wasn't deemed that much for the IPv6 documentation address.
Example documentation is a base function of the technology, and is not truly a function of the Asia-Pacific region or its resources.
Why not? Operators need to write documentation too, not just IETF standards developers...
This suggests that the proposal should go directly to the IETF. If the IPv6 documentation address range had originally been taken through APNIC prior to submission to the IETF
That was taken to the IETF when one participant in the IETF noted that the APNIC proposal did something that this participant had been thinking about but had never actually got around to documenting. It really wouldn't have mattered one jot if it had gone to the IETF or not.
then I suggest that the discussion at APNIC 25 regarding prop-058 provides a more recent and therefore overriding precedent on similar issues to this proposal.
Not at all. prop-58 had potentially huge impact, which if accepted would significantly affect all the APNIC membership for the benefit of a few providers at a global scale.
I haven't yet seen any reasoning here why prop-61 is to the detriment of APNIC membership.