[sig-policy] Comments for prop-105 and prop-107.
We had an opinion collection meeting with our community in Japan, and
would like to share our input.
For, prop-105, we support this proposal as it is.
For prop-107, while there was no concern expressed over the proposal,
some questions were also raised about the needs of the proposal:
<prop-107 related question as below>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q1. Does it require the needs based criteria, i.e., plan to be multi-
homed for ASN transfer?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q2. If the answer to Q1 is yes, in what kind of cases would one wish
to transfer ASN while you can still receive assignments from APNIC?
----
We tried some case studies but one has identified clear needs:
a. M&A or business purchase
You can transfer IPv4 and ASN at the same time under the
current policy.
b. To receive 2 byte ASN rather than 4 byte
Assignment rate of 4 byte ASN in the region is relatively high,
and there are still 2 byte ASN remaining in APNIC pool.
c. Transfer a part of IPv4 allocations and ASN
If IPv4 allocations are only partially transferred to another
organization, the transfer source is likely to need the
existing ASN to advertise the remaining IPv4 blocks, which
were not transferred.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Related to Q2., there was a comment expressed that this policy may only
apply to a very rare case.
e.g., an organization has multiple ASNs, and some of it is unused, and
there is an organization that wishes to receive this particular ASN
range, without M&A or business purchase.
====
Best regards,
---
TACHIBANA toshio