• Date Prev
• Date Next
• Thread Prev
• Thread Next
• Date Index
• Thread Index

Re: [sig-policy] The status of APNIC's IPv4 resources

• To: Masato Yamanishi <myamanis at gmail dot com>
• Subject: Re: [sig-policy] The status of APNIC's IPv4 resources
• From: Owen DeLong <owen at delong dot com>
• Date: Tue, 15 Sep 2015 11:33:01 -0700
• Cc: "sig-policy at lists dot apnic dot net" <sig-policy at lists dot apnic dot net>
• Delivered-to: sig-policy at mailman dot apnic dot net
• In-reply-to: <CALcH-8myeYhG0Y9uZ6f1fZsujs5UvP7mW1Db38cRzYqdtO-_Ag at mail dot gmail dot com>
• 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>

Note, I said “at least”. However, i don’t think string it out further is any more justified because the only way to do that is to deny the legitimate needs of new organizations today for the sake of new organizations later. I cannot make a case for doing that. Owen On Sep 15, 2015, at 03:45 , Masato Yamanishi <myamanis at gmail dot com> wrote: Owen and All, > I think this is an appropriate time frame for runout of this pool as it will be at least that long before new entrants are not > in need of some way to communicate with the legacy IPv4 internet. In 2010, I was told that the transition would be end in 5 years. In 2000…… Where are we right now? I bet my 5 cents that we just started long long way. Regards, Masato Yamanishi 2015-09-15 2:36 GMT+09:00 Owen DeLong <owen at delong dot com>: On Sep 14, 2015, at 01:59 , Masato Yamanishi <myamanis at gmail dot com> wrote: Dear Colleagues, In Jakarta, Geoff Huston presented the status of our IPv4 resources, in particular about exhaustion and transfer, and some participants asked to summarize and post it to the list for further discussion. Following is Chairs' summary of the presentation and discussion. 1. Status of APNIC Final /8 pool (103/8)    - Will run out ~4-5 years I think this is an appropriate time frame for runout of this pool as it will be at least that long before new entrants are not in need of some way to communicate with the legacy IPv4 internet. 2. Status of IANA Recovered pool (non-103)    - Will run out in next 7 months+    - IANA may allocate additional space in every 6 months    - This pool will repeatedly ‘run-out’ as IANA delegates more space and it is distributed by APNIC    - May need policy to deal with temporary exhaustion of the non-103 pool      -> Close the door when exhausted or create the waiting list and put further applications to there? I really don’t care what we do here. What would be the default action if no policy change is enacted? Can we get clarification from staff on that? Absent that being a particularly bad outcome (unlikely), I say let’s not focus on rearranging the IPv4 deck chairs any further. 3. Some address spaces in 103/8 were transferred within 12months since initial allocation    - There is no policy to prohibit it while the Secretariat asks in review process Closing the door after the horses have left the barn is likely pointless. The community specifically chose to exclude this concern from the transfer policy during its development (it’s not like it was not discussed), so I say let’s spend this energy getting IPv6 deployed rather than rearranging the IPv4 deck chairs any further. Owen Date Prev Date Next Thread Prev Thread Next Date Index Thread Index Date Prev Date Next Thread Prev Thread Next Date Index Thread Index Prev by Date: Re: [sig-policy] The status of APNIC's IPv4 resources Previous by Thread: Re: [sig-policy] The status of APNIC's IPv4 resources Index(es): Date Thread