* Skeeve Stevens <skeeve+sigpol...@eintellegonetworks.asia>
> *Cc:* Guangliang Pan <g...@apnic.net>; mailman_SIG-policy <
> sig-pol...@apnic.net>
> *Subject:* Re: [sig-policy] prop-123-v001: Modify 103/8 IPv4 transfer
> policy [SECURITY=UNCLASSIFIED]
>
>
>
> I
>> wrote:
>> Hi Aftab,
>>
>>
>>
>> The number of M transfers involved 103/8 address block from 15 April 2011
>> to 14 Sep 2017 is 257.
>>
>>
>>
>> Kind regards,
>>
>> Guangliang
>>
>> ==
>&g
gt;
>> The number of M transfers involved 103/8 address block from 15 April
>> 2011 to 14 Sep 2017 is 257.
>>
>>
>>
>> Kind regards,
>>
>> Guangliang
>>
>> ======
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* Aftab Siddiqui [mailto
m: Aftab Siddiqui [mailto:aftab.siddi...@gmail.com
> <mailto:aftab.siddi...@gmail.com>]
> Sent: Monday, 29 January 2018 8:49 PM
> To: Guangliang Pan <g...@apnic.net <mailto:g...@apnic.net>>
> Cc: Sanjeev Gupta <sanj...@dcs1.biz <mailto:sanj...@dcs1.biz>>
5 April
>> 2011 to 14 Sep 2017 is 257.
>>
>>
>>
>> Kind regards,
>>
>> Guangliang
>>
>> ==
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* Aftab Siddiqui [mailto:aftab.siddi...@gmail.com]
>> *Sent:* Monday, 29 January 2018 8:49
ot allowed to transfer as of today according to prop-116-v006.
>
>
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Guangliang
>
> =
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* sig-policy-boun...@lists.apnic.net [mailto:sig-policy-bounces@
> lists.apnic.net] *On Behalf Of *Sanjeev Gupta
> *Sen
uangliang
>>
>> ==
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* Aftab Siddiqui [mailto:aftab.siddi...@gmail.com]
>> *Sent:* Monday, 29 January 2018 8:49 PM
>> *To:* Guangliang Pan <g...@apnic.net>
>> *Cc:* Sanjeev Gupta <sanj...@dcs1.biz>; mailman_SIG-policy
g...@apnic.net>
> *Cc:* Sanjeev Gupta <sanj...@dcs1.biz>; mailman_SIG-policy <
> sig-pol...@apnic.net>
>
> *Subject:* Re: [sig-policy] prop-123-v001: Modify 103/8 IPv4 transfer
> policy [SECURITY=UNCLASSIFIED]
>
>
>
> Hi Guangliang,
>
> How ma
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
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:
10 matches
Mail list logo