Re: [sig-policy] Policy Proposal: prop-130-v001: Modification of transfer policies
Hi all,
About the part of IPv6, we oppose this. other parts are neutral.
We have to make efforts to aggrigate IPv6 routes and to maintain sparse allocation
mechanism. Since each registry has enough IPv6 prefix,
it is better to receive a new prefix from the registry, especially partial M&A case.
About inter-RIR, there are not consensus about (M&A and/or market)transfer IPv6 address
between RIRs. First of all, we think we need to discuss about it.
Regards,
Hiroki
---
Hiroki Kawabata
Japan Network Information Center(JPNIC)
Subject: [sig-policy] Policy Proposal: prop-130-v001: Modification of transfer policies
Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2019 18:59:19 +0600
From: Sumon Ahmed Sabir <sasabir@gmail.com>
Dear SIG members,
The proposal "prop-130-v001: Modification of transfer policies"
has been sent to the Policy SIG for review.
It will be presented at the Open Policy Meeting at APNIC 48 in
Chiang Mai, Thailand on Thursday, 12 September 2019.
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 proposal is available at:
http://www.apnic.net/policy/proposals/prop-130
Regards
Sumon, Bertrand, Ching-Heng
APNIC Policy SIG Chairs
* sig-policy: APNIC SIG on resource management policy *
_______________________________________________
sig-policy mailing list
sig-policy@lists.apnic.net
https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy