Re: [sig-policy] prop-081: Eligibility for assignments fromthe final /8
have NO link to co-chair's opinion about this proposal
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The final /8 provides 16384 allocations with /22 size,
we currently have only about 2200 members,
consider each account holder only get one allocation from the final /8,
there is no reason to beleive we should exclude
Critical infrastructure/IXP/Multihoming applicants
from the final /8 because of lacking IPv4 space.
They only take up one share from the 16384 delegations
as all LIRs do.
Regards
Terence
CNNIC
----- Original Message -----
From: "Seiichi Kawamura" <kawamucho at mesh dot ad dot jp>
To: "Terence Zhang YH(CNNIC)" <zhangyinghao at cnnic dot cn>
Cc: "Randy Bush" <randy at psg dot com>; "Izumi Okutani" <izumi at nic dot ad dot jp>; <sig-policy at lists dot apnic dot net>
Sent: Wednesday, February 24, 2010 10:45 AM
Subject: Re: [sig-policy] prop-081: Eligibility for assignments fromthe final /8
> -----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 at psg dot com>
>> To: "Izumi Okutani" <izumi at nic dot ad dot jp>
>> Cc: <sig-policy at lists dot apnic dot 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 at lists dot apnic dot net
>>> http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy
>> * sig-policy: APNIC SIG on resource management policy *
>> _______________________________________________
>> sig-policy mailing list
>> sig-policy at lists dot apnic dot net
>> http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy
>>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (MingW32)
>
> iEYEARECAAYFAkuEkq4ACgkQcrhTYfxyMkIWrQCfc1t8jqBKLbMzTuwKGfhXf4S3
> g0wAni2wMCuamrkifCfmXQjDddAx7rWw
> =mKwl