[sig-policy] prop-120-v002: Final /8 pool exhaustion plan

[Bertrand Cherrier]

Dear SIG members

A new version of the proposal "prop-120: Final /8 pool exhaustion plan" has 
been sent to the Policy SIG for review.

Information about earlier versions is available from:

https://www.apnic.net/community/policy/proposals/prop-120/ 


You are encouraged to express your views on the proposal:

 - Do you support or oppose the proposal?
 - Is there anything in the proposal that is not clear?
 - What changes could be made to this proposal to make it more effective?

Please find the text of the proposal below.

Kind Regards,

Sumon, Bertrand, Ching-Heng
APNIC Policy SIG Chairs



---

prop-120-v002: Final /8 pool exhaustion plan

---

Proposer:   Tomohiro Fujisaki
   fujisaki at syce dot net


1. Problem statement


APNIC makes IPv4 address delegation from two IPv4 pools. These are the
103/8 (Final /8) pool and the non-103/8 IPv4 Recovered pool.

Currently, there are no IPv4 addresses in the non-103/8 IPv4 Recovered
pool and APNIC manages a Recovered Pool Waiting List for approved
requests. And, based on the Geoff's projection (*1), the 103/8 (Final
/8) pool will be exhausted in a few years.

It will be necessary to make a guidance about how to manage the IPv4
delegation after both IPv4 pools exhaustion.


2. Objective of policy change
-

To provide a guidance for 103/8 pool exhaustion.


3. Situation in other regions
-

None.


4. Proposed policy solution
---

Guidance for 103/8 pool exhaustion:

 - The first time an approved request cannot be fulfilled from the 103/8
   pool, a waiting list will be created. That waiting list will be
   managed same as recovered pool waiting list.

 - APNIC continue to manage two pools, the recovered pool and the 103/8 pool.

5. Advantages / Disadvantages
-

Advantages:

 - Possible to avoid confusion at 103/8 address pool exhaustion date

Disadvantages:

None.


6. Impact on resource holders
--

No impact to resource holders.


7. References
-
1. IPv4 Address Report
 http://www.potaroo.net/tools/ipv4/ 

Cordialement,
___
Bertrand Cherrier
Administration Systèmes - R
Micro Logic Systems
b.cherr...@micrologic.nc 
https://www.mls.nc 
Tél : +687 24 99 24
VoIP : 65 24 99 24
SAV : +687 36 67 76 (58F/min)

*  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

Re: [sig-policy] prop-123-v001: Modify 103/8 IPv4 transfer policy

[Aftab Siddiqui]

Hi Alex,

> 1. Problem statement
> ---
>
> Policy Proposal prop-116-v006: Prohibit to transfer IPv4 addresses in
> the final /8 block reached consensus at the APNIC 44 AMM on 14 Sep
> 2017. Since that APNIC has stopped all the IPv4 transfers from 103/8
> block if the delegation date is less than 5 years.
>
> However, some of the 103/8 ranges were delegated before 14 Sep 2017.
> Those resources should not be subjected to 5 years restriction. The
> community was not aware of the restriction when they received those
> resources, some of the resources have been transferred or planning to
> transfer.
>
> ftp://ftp.apnic.net/apnic/docs/membership-agreement.txt

5General


5.1APNIC Documents
The Member agrees that:
(a) The APNIC Documents may be amended from time to time in
accordance with the Document Review Policy;
(b) Any such amendments are binding upon the Member;
(c) APNIC Documents as they exist from time to time form an integral
part of and apply fully to this agreement; and


If APNIC is not allow those transfers to be registered,
> there will be underground transfers.
>
> You mean leasing? or resource holder gives away access to myapnic account
along with resources? because there is no such thing as underground
transfer.

> This will cause incorrect APNIC Whois data.
>
>  I appreciate your intentions.
-- 
Best Wishes,

Aftab A. Siddiqui
*  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

Re: [sig-policy] sig-policy Digest, Vol 164, Issue 10

[yang...@126.com]

 those ranges were delegated from APNIC since 14
> Sep 2017.
>
>
> 5. Advantages / Disadvantages
> ---
>
> Advantages:
>
> - Allow APNIC to register those 103/8 transfers to keep the APNIC
>   Whois data correct.
>
>
> Disadvantages:
>
> None.
>
>
> 6. Impact on resource holders
> ---
>
> Resource holders are allowed to transfer 103/8 ranges if the resources
> were delegated before 14 Sep 2017.
>
>
>
> 7. References
> ---
>
>
> *  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
>
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 
<http://mailman.apnic.net/mailing-lists/sig-policy/attachments/20180129/533be3d9/attachment.html>
 
--
 
Message: 2
Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2018 16:00:44 +0530
From: Ajai Kumar <joinaj...@gmail.com>
To: Sanjeev Gupta <sanj...@dcs1.biz>
Cc: sig-policy <sig-pol...@apnic.net>
Subject: Re: [sig-policy] prop-123-v001: Modify 103/8 IPv4 transfer
policy
Message-ID:
<cal41znm5ws5j+tu6f0stdxmzhqpt_mgfejlonhabdutewgn...@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
 
Dear All,
For M cases, APNIC Secretariat has clear guidelines to handle it. I fully
agree with Rajesh on it.
Regards,
Ajai Kumar
 
On 29 January 2018 at 12:04, Sanjeev Gupta <sanj...@dcs1.biz> wrote:
 
> Rajesh, the issue will be that the Secretariat has to be given a clear
> definition of "genuine".  It is unfair to them to expect that they
> administer a rule which is not well defined.
>
> Putting a date makes life clear (not better, but clear).
>
>
> --
> Sanjeev Gupta
> +65 98551208 <+65%209855%201208>   http://sg.linkedin.com/in/ghane
>
> On Mon, Jan 29, 2018 at 1:52 PM, Rajesh Panwala <raj...@smartlinkindia.com
> > wrote:
>
>> I partially support the policy. For genuine M cases , there should not
>> be any restriction on transfer of resources. M activities are part and
>> parcel of routine business and no one knows when will it take place.
>>
>> regards,
>>
>> Rajesh Panwala
>> For Smartlink Solutions Pvt. Ltd.
>> +91-9227886001 <+91%2092278%2086001>
>>
>> On Fri, Jan 26, 2018 at 8:57 AM, Bertrand Cherrier <
>> b.cherr...@micrologic.nc> wrote:
>>
>>> Dear SIG members,
>>>
>>> The proposal "prop-123-v001: Modify 103/8 IPv4 transfer policy" has
>>> been sent to the Policy SIG for review.
>>>
>>> It will be presented at the Open Policy Meeting at APNIC 45 in
>>> Kathmandu, Nepal on Tuesday, 27 February 2018.
>>>
>>> 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-123
>>>
>>> Regards
>>>
>>> Sumon, Bertrand, Ching-Heng
>>> APNIC Policy SIG Chairs
>>>
>>> https://www.apnic.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/prop-123-v001.txt
>>>
>>> ---
>>>
>>> prop-123-v001: Modify 103/8 IPv4 transfer policy
>>>
>>> ---
>>>
>>> Proposer:Alex Yang
>>>  yang...@126.com
>>>
>>>
>>> 1. Problem statement
>>> ---
>>>
>>> Policy Proposal prop-116-v006: Prohibit to transfer IPv4 addresses in
>>> the final /8 block reached consensus at the APNIC 44 AMM on 14 Sep
>>> 2017. Since that APNIC has stopped all the IPv4 transfers

Re: [sig-policy] prop-123-v001: Modify 103/8 IPv4 transfer policy

[Satoru Tsurumaki]

Dear Proposer

I would like to clarify.

My understanding is:
Prop-116 will be subject to the 103/8 IPv4 address which allocated before
14 Sep 2017 and be transferred after this proposal will consensus.
It's mean that these address will be allowed to transfer "ONE-TIME".

Is it correct ?

Regards,

Satoru Tsurumaki
JPOPF Steering Team (former JPNIC Policy Working Group)




2018-01-26 12:27 GMT+09:00 Bertrand Cherrier :

> Dear SIG members,
>
> The proposal "prop-123-v001: Modify 103/8 IPv4 transfer policy" has
> been sent to the Policy SIG for review.
>
> It will be presented at the Open Policy Meeting at APNIC 45 in
> Kathmandu, Nepal on Tuesday, 27 February 2018.
>
> 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-123
>
> Regards
>
> Sumon, Bertrand, Ching-Heng
> APNIC Policy SIG Chairs
>
> https://www.apnic.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/prop-123-v001.txt
>
> ---
>
> prop-123-v001: Modify 103/8 IPv4 transfer policy
>
> ---
>
> Proposer:Alex Yang
>  yang...@126.com
>
>
> 1. Problem statement
> ---
>
> Policy Proposal prop-116-v006: Prohibit to transfer IPv4 addresses in
> the final /8 block reached consensus at the APNIC 44 AMM on 14 Sep
> 2017. Since that APNIC has stopped all the IPv4 transfers from 103/8
> block if the delegation date is less than 5 years.
>
> However, some of the 103/8 ranges were delegated before 14 Sep 2017.
> Those resources should not be subjected to 5 years restriction. The
> community was not aware of the restriction when they received those
> resources, some of the resources have been transferred or planning to
> transfer. If APNIC is not allow those transfers to be registered,
> there will be underground transfers. This will cause incorrect APNIC
> Whois data.
>
>
> 2. Objective of policy change
> ---
>
> To keep the APNIC Whois data correct.
>
>
> 3. Situation in other regions
> ---
>
> No such situation in other regions.
>
>
> 4. Proposed policy solution
> ---
>
> “Prohibit transfer IPv4 addresses under final /8 address block (103/8)
> which have not passed five years after its allocation/assignment”
> should only apply to those ranges were delegated from APNIC since 14
> Sep 2017.
>
>
> 5. Advantages / Disadvantages
> ---
>
> Advantages:
>
> - Allow APNIC to register those 103/8 transfers to keep the APNIC
>   Whois data correct.
>
>
> Disadvantages:
>
> None.
>
>
> 6. Impact on resource holders
> ---
>
> Resource holders are allowed to transfer 103/8 ranges if the resources
> were delegated before 14 Sep 2017.
>
>
>
> 7. References
> ---
>
>
> *  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
>
*  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

Re: [sig-policy] prop-123-v001: Modify 103/8 IPv4 transfer policy

[Guangliang Pan]

;
>>> https://www.apnic.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/prop-123-v001.txt
>>>
>>> ---
>>>
>>> prop-123-v001: Modify 103/8 IPv4 transfer policy
>>>
>>> ---
>>>
>>> Proposer:Alex Yang
>>>  yang...@126.com
>>>
>>>
>>> 1. Problem statement
>>> ---
>>>
>>> Policy Proposal prop-116-v006: Prohibit to transfer IPv4 addresses 
>>> in the final /8 block reached consensus at the APNIC 44 AMM on 14 
>>> Sep 2017. Since that APNIC has stopped all the IPv4 transfers from
>>> 103/8 block if the delegation date is less than 5 years.
>>>
>>> However, some of the 103/8 ranges were delegated before 14 Sep 2017.
>>> Those resources should not be subjected to 5 years restriction. The 
>>> community was not aware of the restriction when they received those 
>>> resources, some of the resources have been transferred or planning 
>>> to transfer. If APNIC is not allow those transfers to be registered, 
>>> there will be underground transfers. This will cause incorrect APNIC 
>>> Whois data.
>>>
>>>
>>> 2. Objective of policy change
>>> ---
>>>
>>> To keep the APNIC Whois data correct.
>>>
>>>
>>> 3. Situation in other regions
>>> ---
>>>
>>> No such situation in other regions.
>>>
>>>
>>> 4. Proposed policy solution
>>> ---
>>>
>>> ?Prohibit transfer IPv4 addresses under final /8 address block
>>> (103/8) which have not passed five years after its
allocation/assignment?
>>> should only apply to those ranges were delegated from APNIC since 14 
>>> Sep 2017.
>>>
>>>
>>> 5. Advantages / Disadvantages
>>> ---
>>>
>>> Advantages:
>>>
>>> - Allow APNIC to register those 103/8 transfers to keep the APNIC
>>>   Whois data correct.
>>>
>>>
>>> Disadvantages:
>>>
>>> None.
>>>
>>>
>>> 6. Impact on resource holders
>>> ---
>>>
>>> Resource holders are allowed to transfer 103/8 ranges if the 
>>> resources were delegated before 14 Sep 2017.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 7. References
>>> ---
>>>
>>>
>>> *  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
>>>
>>
>>
>> *  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
>>
>
>
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://mailman.apnic.net/mailing-lists/sig-policy/attachments/20180129/13c4
1d4f/attachment.html>

--

Message: 2
Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2018 13:12:33 +0500
From: "Yasir Shamim, Muhammad" <yasir.sha...@cyber.net.pk>
To: <sig-policy@lists.apnic.net>
Subject: [sig-policy] sig-policy Digest, Vol 164, Issue 7
Message-ID: <01fc01d398d8$eb05a550$c110eff0$@cyber.net.pk>
Content-Type: text/plain;   charset="US-ASCII"

Hi APNIC Secretariat

How many transfers will be affected by prop-116-v006, since 14th Sep 2017 ?

Regards
Muhammad Yasir Shamim

-Original Message-
From: sig-policy-boun...@lists.apnic.net
[mailto:sig-policy-boun...@lists.apnic.net] On Behalf Of 
sig-policy-requ...@lists.apnic.net
Sent: Monday, January 29, 2018 11:44 AM
To: sig-policy@lists.apnic.net
Subject: sig-policy Digest, Vol 164, Issue 7

Send sig-policy mailing list submissions to
sig-policy@lists.apnic.net

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
sig-policy-requ...@lists.apnic.net

You can reach the perso

[sig-policy] prop-123-v001: Modify 103/8 IPv4 transfer policy

[Yasir Shamim, Muhammad]

;>> in the final /8 block reached consensus at the APNIC 44 AMM on 14 
>>> Sep 2017. Since that APNIC has stopped all the IPv4 transfers from 
>>> 103/8 block if the delegation date is less than 5 years.
>>>
>>> However, some of the 103/8 ranges were delegated before 14 Sep 2017.
>>> Those resources should not be subjected to 5 years restriction. The 
>>> community was not aware of the restriction when they received those 
>>> resources, some of the resources have been transferred or planning 
>>> to transfer. If APNIC is not allow those transfers to be registered, 
>>> there will be underground transfers. This will cause incorrect APNIC 
>>> Whois data.
>>>
>>>
>>> 2. Objective of policy change
>>> ---
>>>
>>> To keep the APNIC Whois data correct.
>>>
>>>
>>> 3. Situation in other regions
>>> ---
>>>
>>> No such situation in other regions.
>>>
>>>
>>> 4. Proposed policy solution
>>> ---
>>>
>>> ?Prohibit transfer IPv4 addresses under final /8 address block 
>>> (103/8) which have not passed five years after its
allocation/assignment?
>>> should only apply to those ranges were delegated from APNIC since 14 
>>> Sep 2017.
>>>
>>>
>>> 5. Advantages / Disadvantages
>>> ---
>>>
>>> Advantages:
>>>
>>> - Allow APNIC to register those 103/8 transfers to keep the APNIC
>>>   Whois data correct.
>>>
>>>
>>> Disadvantages:
>>>
>>> None.
>>>
>>>
>>> 6. Impact on resource holders
>>> ---
>>>
>>> Resource holders are allowed to transfer 103/8 ranges if the 
>>> resources were delegated before 14 Sep 2017.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 7. References
>>> ---
>>>
>>>
>>> *  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
>>>
>>
>>
>> *  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
>>
>
>
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://mailman.apnic.net/mailing-lists/sig-policy/attachments/20180129/13c4
1d4f/attachment.html>

--

Message: 2
Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2018 13:12:33 +0500
From: "Yasir Shamim, Muhammad" <yasir.sha...@cyber.net.pk>
To: <sig-policy@lists.apnic.net>
Subject: [sig-policy] sig-policy Digest, Vol 164, Issue 7
Message-ID: <01fc01d398d8$eb05a550$c110eff0$@cyber.net.pk>
Content-Type: text/plain;   charset="US-ASCII"

Hi APNIC Secretariat

How many transfers will be affected by prop-116-v006, since 14th Sep 2017 ?

Regards
Muhammad Yasir Shamim

-Original Message-
From: sig-policy-boun...@lists.apnic.net
[mailto:sig-policy-boun...@lists.apnic.net] On Behalf Of
sig-policy-requ...@lists.apnic.net
Sent: Monday, January 29, 2018 11:44 AM
To: sig-policy@lists.apnic.net
Subject: sig-policy Digest, Vol 164, Issue 7

Send sig-policy mailing list submissions to
sig-policy@lists.apnic.net

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
sig-policy-requ...@lists.apnic.net

You can reach the person managing the list at
sig-policy-ow...@lists.apnic.net

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than
"Re: Contents of sig-policy digest..."


Today's Topics:

   1. Re:  prop-123-v001: Modify 103/8 IPv4 transfer policy
  (Sanjeev Gupta)
   2. Re:  prop-123-v001: Modify 103/8 IPv4 transferpolicy
  [SECURITY=UNCLASSIFIED] (Guangliang Pan)


--

Message: 1
Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2018 14:34:02 +0800
From: Sanjeev Gupta <sanj...@dcs1.biz>
To: Rajesh Panwala <raj...@smartlinkindia.com>
Cc: sig-policy <sig-p

[sig-policy] sig-policy Digest, Vol 164, Issue 7

[Yasir Shamim, Muhammad]

. If APNIC is not allow those transfers to be registered,
>> there will be underground transfers. This will cause incorrect APNIC
>> Whois data.
>>
>>
>> 2. Objective of policy change
>> ---
>>
>> To keep the APNIC Whois data correct.
>>
>>
>> 3. Situation in other regions
>> ---
>>
>> No such situation in other regions.
>>
>>
>> 4. Proposed policy solution
>> ---
>>
>> ?Prohibit transfer IPv4 addresses under final /8 address block (103/8)
>> which have not passed five years after its allocation/assignment?
>> should only apply to those ranges were delegated from APNIC since 14
>> Sep 2017.
>>
>>
>> 5. Advantages / Disadvantages
>> ---
>>
>> Advantages:
>>
>> - Allow APNIC to register those 103/8 transfers to keep the APNIC
>>   Whois data correct.
>>
>>
>> Disadvantages:
>>
>> None.
>>
>>
>> 6. Impact on resource holders
>> ---
>>
>> Resource holders are allowed to transfer 103/8 ranges if the resources
>> were delegated before 14 Sep 2017.
>>
>>
>>
>> 7. References
>> ---
>>
>>
>> *  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
>>
>
>
> *  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
>
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://mailman.apnic.net/mailing-lists/sig-policy/attachments/20180129/beae
47c4/attachment.html>

--

Message: 2
Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2018 06:43:36 +
From: Guangliang Pan <g...@apnic.net>
To: Sanjeev Gupta <sanj...@dcs1.biz>
Cc: mailman_SIG-policy <sig-pol...@apnic.net>
Subject: Re: [sig-policy] prop-123-v001: Modify 103/8 IPv4 transfer
policy  [SECURITY=UNCLASSIFIED]
Message-ID:

<sg2pr04mb1613124f00aa3b87fb48e674c6...@sg2pr04mb1613.apcprd04.prod.outlook.
com>

Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

Hi Sanjeev,

The number of delegations from 103/8 pool since 29 Jan 2013 (Five years
count back from today) to 14 Sep 2017 is 10868. These are the delegations
are not allowed to transfer as of today according to prop-116-v006.

Kind regards,
Guangliang
=


From: sig-policy-boun...@lists.apnic.net
[mailto:sig-policy-boun...@lists.apnic.net] On Behalf Of Sanjeev Gupta
Sent: Monday, 29 January 2018 3:34 PM
To: Henderson Mike, Mr <michael.hender...@nzdf.mil.nz>
Cc: mailman_SIG-policy <sig-pol...@apnic.net>
Subject: Re: [sig-policy] prop-123-v001: Modify 103/8 IPv4 transfer policy
[SECURITY=UNCLASSIFIED]

Hi,

I see this as more of a "do not make policy retroactively".  People who
"bought" an "asset" in good faith should not be told it is worth different
now.

I am amenable to changing the cut-off date in Prop-123 to the date it was
sent to the Policy SIG, as that might have given warning to people the rules
were changing.

APNIC Secretariat, how many transfers will be affected by Prop-123?


--
Sanjeev Gupta
+65 98551208   http://sg.linkedin.com/in/ghane

On Mon, Jan 29, 2018 at 4:16 AM, Henderson Mike, Mr
<michael.hender...@nzdf.mil.nz<mailto:michael.hender...@nzdf.mil.nz>> wrote:
Not supported

The proposal should in my opinion be amended to read:
___

Disadvantages:



None Completely negates the purpose of prop-116-v006: Prohibit to transfer
IPv4 addresses in

the final /8 block.
___


Regards


Mike

From:
sig-policy-boun...@lists.apnic.net<mailto:sig-policy-boun...@lists.apnic.net
>
[mailto:sig-policy-boun...@lists.apnic.net<mailto:sig-policy-bounces@lists.a
pnic.net>] On Behalf Of Bertrand Cherrier
Sent: Friday, 26 January 2018 4:28 p.m.
To: sig-pol...@apnic.net<mailto:sig-pol...@apnic.net>
Subject: [sig-policy] prop-123-v001: Modify 103/8 IPv4 transfer policy

Dear SIG members,

The proposal "prop-123-v001: Modify 103/8 IPv4 transfer policy" has
been sent to the Policy SIG for review.

It will be presented at the Open Policy Meeting at APNIC 45 in
Kathmandu, Nepal on Tuesday, 27 F