Re: [sig-policy] prop-103-v001: A Final IP Address Policy Proposal
I oppose this proposal.
I understand the concerning point that Randy and Kawamura-san might feel.
However, as long as there are those who want to propose, we should not
shut a door whether the proposal is for IPv4 or not.
I think it is just the PDP and it is just The Internet.
---
Satoru Tsurumaki
Softbank BB Corp.
2012/7/9 Andy Linton <asjl at lpnz dot org>:
> Dear SIG members
>
> The proposal "prop-103-v001: A Final IP Address Policy Proposal" has
> been sent to the Policy SIG for review.
>
> It will be discussed at the Policy SIG at APNIC 34 in Phnom Penh,
> Cambodia, Thursday, 30 August 2012.
>
> We invite you to review and comment on the proposal on the mailing list
> before the meeting.
>
> The comment period on the mailing list before an APNIC meeting is an
> important part of the policy development process. We encourage you to
> express your views on the proposal:
>
> - Do you support or oppose this proposal?
> - Does this proposal solve a problem you are experiencing? If
> so, tell the community about your situation.
> - Do you see any disadvantages in this proposal?
> - Is there anything in the proposal that is not clear?
> - What changes could be made to this proposal to make it more
> effective?
>
> Information about this and other policy proposals is available from:
>
> https://www.apnic.net/policy/proposals/prop-103
>
> Andy, Skeeve, Masato
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> prop-103-v001: A Final IP Address Policy Proposal
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Author: Randy Bush
> <randy at psg dot com>
>
>
> 1. Introduction
> -------------------
>
> IPv4 is history, with no need to add more policy. IPv6 is sufficiently
> plentiful that further policies are not needed. So let us agree to make
> no more IP address policies or proposals.
>
>
> 2. Summary
> ----------------
>
> The APNIC community spends time and resources proposing, discussing,
> arguing, ... about IP address policies out of habit. The process is no
> longer relevant to actually coordinating the prudent and high quality
> operation of the internet.
>
>
> 3. Situation in other RIRs
> ---------------------------------
>
> There is an industry of policy wannabes spending inordinate time and
> resources making endless policy proposals about miniscule issues and
> baroque corner cases. This is a waste of time and other resources.
>
>
> 4. Details
> -------------
>
> The policy proposal and decision processes should be closed and stopped
> after the Phnom Penh meeting.
>
> Should an emergency arise, where community consensus is needed, the EC
> can organize fora for forming that consensus.
>
>
> 5. Pros/Cons
> -----------------
>
> Advantages:
>
> - We would not have to spend time discussing things of small
> consequence and which do not help the customer/user in any real way.
>
> Disadvantages:
>
> - It would impact the amateur careers of policy wannabes. This is a
> feature, not a bug.
>
>
> 6. Effect on APNIC
> -------------------------
>
> Saves money, time, and other resources such as administrative complexity
> created by more complex but useless policies.
>
>
> 7. Effect on NIRs
> -----------------------
>
> Saves money, time, and other resources such as administrative complexity
> created by more complex but useless policies..
> * 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