Re: [sig-policy] prop-106-v001: Restricting excessive IPv4 address trans

To: Tomohiro -INSTALLER- Fujisaki/藤崎智宏 <fujisaki at syce dot net>

Subject: Re: [sig-policy] prop-106-v001: Restricting excessive IPv4 address transfers under the final /8 block

From: Aftab Siddiqui <aftab.siddiqui at gmail dot com>

Date: Sat, 23 Feb 2013 10:03:55 +0500

Cc: Policy SIG <sig-policy at apnic dot net>

Delivered-to: sig-policy at mailman dot apnic dot net

Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:x-received:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id :subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=HGIZkt7LZOSn43m4oH3ogR+9R525iy/GyojVRG2+gjA=; b=k+EGUPPvA8BPjoleH0z7z5S+YSJDPi/lYTosTIEqIGdD6PyPwgbWnZWzq3oD0ytMvg pAWGZuHZ0ck8LwtDVTdq7IPPpp4cZLbIlasbH+xzrPkzkH4xtYxYRngDsWQOvKbq6J9l sDQoG4lShxbWO9ZvsyuVhklX0BmiieTP6mgYUmdNlW8SqSmAw7jfWtUO/mXiLBOKmhWY 77LTTJ9AfEBUjlw4k3DjV7zvCGk7Lued/mPgh1umXQvIvoy9djqft91KkB9Fkzmz1Izu IKebXFavbP/ZKMEO5KBxmk5anWBV434sRaw42YalLhaZ5pvngqJW7aWZE8pF/xa/paHi F+2g==

In-reply-to: <20130222.221151.263718018.fujisaki at syce 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/options/sig-policy>, <mailto:sig-policy-request@lists.apnic.net?subject=unsubscribe>

References: <CALS-_OpULYxmjRurZh7d=SsCUfgvvkW1PUjTMSbzj9zzKPeZDQ@mail.gmail.com> <20130222.221151.263718018.fujisaki@syce.net>

Regards,

Aftab A. Siddiqui

Hi Tomohiro,

So, we would like to change our proposal to describe the spilt of /8
policy and remarks spirit in the guideline document such as:

- IPv4 address transfer under 103/8 block may not be approved, in
cases where APNIC/NIRs considers that it does not match with the
spirit of the final /8 policy.

This would allow APNIC/NIRs referring to the guidelines document, when
they find the case of misuse.

I doubt if there is any provision of having a Guideline document instead of policy proposal. Bylaws are there for the same purpose. Or please enlighten me if I'm wrong.

APNIC ByLaws:
Part II - Objects

The objects of APNIC are:
a: to provide the service of allocating and registering Internet resources for the purpose of enabling communications via open system network protocols and to assist in the development and growth of the Internet in the Asia and Pacific Rim region;

That is the only guideline for APNIC Hostmasters for allocating resources. Secondly, for recently new resource allocation hostmasters says "We don't expect you transfer the resource to another APNIC member account within 12 months. Can you please confirm your understanding?" I think its enough to take this prop back :)