[sig-policy] Summary of discussion: prop-96

To: APNIC Policy SIG List <sig-policy at apnic dot net>
Subject: [sig-policy] Summary of discussion: prop-96
From: Gaurab Raj Upadhaya <gaurab at lahai dot com>
Date: Wed, 23 Feb 2011 01:51:21 +0000
Delivered-to: sig-policy at mailman dot apnic dot net
List-archive: <http://mailman.apnic.net/mailing-lists/sig-policy>
List-help: <mailto:sig-policy-request@lists.apnic.net?subject=help>
List-id: APNIC SIG on resource management policy <sig-policy.lists.apnic.net>
List-post: <mailto:sig-policy@lists.apnic.net>
List-subscribe: <http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy>, <mailto:sig-policy-request@lists.apnic.net?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy>, <mailto:sig-policy-request@lists.apnic.net?subject=unsubscribe>
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; en-US; rv:1.9.2.13) Gecko/20101207 Thunderbird/3.1.7

Hash: SHA1

_______________________________________________________________________

prop-096: Maintaining demonstrated needs requirement in transfer policy
after the final /8 phase
_______________________________________________________________________

Dear SIG members

Below is a summary of discussions on the proposal to date. We encourage
you to continue discussions on the mailing list before the Policy
SIG.

Regards,

Gaurab, Ching-Heng, and Terence


Proposal summary
- ----------------

This is a proposal to maintain the requirement for recipients of IPv4
transfers to justify their need for address space beyond the current
allocation phase and into the final /8 phase.


Discussion statistics
- ---------------------

Version 1 posted to Policy SIG mailing list:   25 January 2011

Number of posts since proposal first posted:   10

Number of people participating in discussions: 6


Summary of discussion to date
- -----------------------------

    - There were strong opinions expressed for and against this proposal.

    - Those for the proposal argue that it rectifies an imbalance in
      policy that will prevent other RIRs from accepting global
      transfers to APNIC.

    - Those against argue that a willingness to pay money for transferred
      resources demonstrates a need and that without an open market for
      transfers these transactions will be driven underground at the
      expense of accurate data in the registry.

          http://www.apnic.net/policy/proposals/prop-096
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.16 (Darwin)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iEYEARECAAYFAk1kaBgACgkQSo7fU26F3X2fTACgw45DnFq2Wj+R1fUomMUg3m6H
XVcAniUa9hWkT6bC7FFEAF2XnMTLoG/h
=AD63
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----