Re: [sig-policy] New Policy Proposal prop-116: Prohibit to transfer IPv4 addresses in the final /8 block

[藤崎智宏]

Hi,

Thank you so much for your comments.

2016-09-21 16:30 GMT+09:00 Nitin Sharma :
> Why we are so specific (last /8).

In my view, that is because how to use the last /8 block was discussed here,
and decided to use for special purpose.

Yours Sincerely,
---
Tomohiro Fujisaki



2016-09-21 16:30 GMT+09:00 Nitin Sharma :
> Hi All,
>
> Why we are so specific (last /8).
>
> As per my view there should be no market transfer other than M&A.
>
> Nitin
>
> On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 12:41 PM, 藤崎智宏  wrote:
>>
>> Hi Yu-ya,
>>
>> Thank you so much for your comment.
>>
>> Mike also mentioned about M&A in his first mail (thank you, Mike),
>> I'll revise my proposal to consider that.
>>
>> Yours Sincerely,
>> ---
>> Tomohiro Fujisaki
>>
>>
>> 2016-09-21 9:28 GMT+09:00 Yuya KAWAKAMI :
>> > I'd like to support the purpose of this proposal itself but I'm afraid
>> > that
>> > anyone who want to obtain more IPv4 addresses seriously will try to do
>> > M&A,
>> > as Mike mentioned. I wonder if there can be better way to prevent such
>> > kind
>> > of transfer.
>> >
>> > Paul and George,
>> > Thank you for providing helpful statistics!
>> >
>> > Regards,
>> > Yuya
>> >
>> > On 2016/09/21 05:11, Masato Yamanishi wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Dear Colleagues,
>> >>
>> >> Regardding this prop-116, I have not yet seen any support, opposition,
>> >> or
>> >> comment, except one clarification made by Mike Jager.
>> >> So, let me ask you to express your views for this proposal on the list
>> >> more since the meeting is reaching within 2 weeks.
>> >>
>> >> Mike> Can you advise your opinion for prop-116 after seeing the number
>> >> of
>> >> tranfers in 103/8 by market and M&A?
>> >>
>> >> Regards,
>> >> Matt
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> 2016-09-08 15:53 GMT+09:00 George Kuo > >> >:
>> >>
>> >> Hi Mike,
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On 7/09/2016 8:09 AM, Mike Jager wrote:
>> >>
>> >> This proposal does not prohibit transfers due to M&A.
>> >> Transfers of 103/8
>> >>
>> >> block due to M&A continues to be allowed, based on the M&A
>> >> transfer
>> >>
>> >> procedures.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> I had always assumed that anyone trying to get more than one
>> >> allocation of 103/8 was creating a separate entity, obtaining APNIC
>> >> membership, receiving the 103/8 allocation, and then using the M&A
>> >> process
>> >> to transfer it to their original entity.
>> >>
>> >> If this is the case, the proposal will be ineffective at
>> >> stopping
>> >> this.
>> >>
>> >> Does APNIC have any information on the relative number of
>> >> transfers within 103/8 that have happened as part of M&As?
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> I have included two tables here for your reference. The numbers for
>> >> Market transfers are available as part of the public transfer logs.
>> >> (ftp://ftp.apnic.net/public/transfers/
>> >> )
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> 1) M&A transfers containing 103/8 space
>> >>
>> >> +--+---+---+-
>> >> |  |   Total   | Number of |
>> >> | Year | Transfers |   /24s|
>> >> +--+---+---+-
>> >> | 2011 | 3 | 12 |
>> >> | 2012 |10 | 46 |
>> >> | 2013 |18 | 66 |
>> >> | 2014 |   126 |498 |
>> >> | 2015 |   147 |573 |
>> >> | 2016 |45 |177 |
>> >> +--+---++-
>> >>
>> >> 2) Market transfers containing 103/8 space
>> >>
>> >> +--+---+---+
>> >> |  |   Total   | Number of |
>> >> | Year | Transfers |   /24s|
>> >> +--+---+---+
>> >> | 2011 | 2 | 2 |
>> >> | 2012 |21 |68 |
>> >> | 2013 |16 |61 |
>> >> | 2014 |25 |95 |
>> >> | 2015 |67 |   266 |
>> >> | 2016 |56 |   206 |
>> >> +--+---+---+
>> >>
>> >> Thanks,
>> >>
>> >> George K
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Cheers
>> >> -Mike
>> >> *  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
>> >> 
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> *  sig-policy:  APNIC SIG on resourc

Re: [sig-policy] New Policy Proposal prop-116: Prohibit to transfer IPv4 addresses in the final /8 block

[Bertrand Cherrier]

Hello everybody,

I support this proposal, but I would add to the proposal (bearing in mind the 
reason for this proposal) 
IPs from the 103/8 block are not to be transfer. They can only be returned to 
the APNIC. 

There are plenty of IPs from other block to be used fro transfer.

Maybe the need for this policy is coming from the fact that it is too easy to 
get a /22 from the 103/8 …

See you in Colombo !

Regards,

> Le 5 sept. 2016 à 21:00, Masato Yamanishi  a écrit :
> 
> Dear SIG members
> 
>  
> 
> The proposal "prop-116: Prohibit to transfer IPv4 addresses in the final
> 
> /8 block" has been sent to the Policy SIG for review.
> 
>  
> 
> It will be presented at the Open Policy Meeting at APNIC 42 in Colombo,
> 
> Sri Lanka on Wednesday, 5 October 2016.
> 
>  
> 
> 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-116 
> 
>  
> 
> Regards
> 
>  
> 
> Masato and Sumon
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
> ---
> 
>  
> 
> prop-116-v001: Prohibit to transfer IPv4 addresses in the final /8 block
> 
>  
> 
> ---
> 
>  
> 
> Proposer:   Tomohiro Fujisaki
> 
> fujis...@syce.net 
>  
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
> 1. Problem statement
> 
> 
> 
>  
> 
> There are a lot of transfers of IPv4 address blocks from 103/8
> 
> happening, both within the APNIC region and among RIRs.
> 
>  
> 
> The percentage of transfers from 103/8 block is over 10%, which looks so
> 
> high, since APNIC manages about 40/8. And also, transfers from the 103/8
> 
> block include:
> 
>   - Take place within 1 year of distribution, or
> 
>   - Multiple blocks to a single organization in case of beyond 1 year.
> 
>  
> 
> Further, there is a case where a single organization have received 12
> 
> blocks transfers from 103 range.
> 
>  
> 
> see:  
> https://www.apnic.net/manage-ip/manage-resources/transfer-resources/transfer-logs
>  
> 
>  
> 
> From these figures, it is quite likely that substantial number of 103/8
> 
> blocks are being used for transfer purpose.
> 
>  
> 
> This conflicts with the concept of distribution of 103/8 block
> 
> (prop-062), which is intended to accommodate minimum IPv4 address blocks
> 
> for new comers.
> 
>  
> 
> 　prop-062: Use of final /8
> 
> 　https://www.apnic.net/policy/proposals/prop-062 
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
> 2. Objective of policy change
> 
> -
> 
>  
> 
> When stated problem is solved, distribution from 103/8 block will be
> 
> consistent with its original purpose, for distribution for new entrants
> 
> to the industry. Without the policy change, substantial portion of 103/8
> 
> blocks will be consumed for transfer purpose.
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
> 3. Situation in other regions
> 
> -
> 
>  
> 
> RIPE-NCC has been discussing to prohibit transfer under the final /8
> 
> address block.
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
> 4. Proposed policy solution
> 
> ---
> 
>  
> 
> Prohibit transfer IPv4 address under /8 address block (103/8). If the
> 
> address block allocated to a LIR is not needed any more, it have to
> 
> return to APNIC to allocate to another organization.
> 
>  
> 
> This proposal does not prohibit transfers due to M&A. Transfers of 103/8
> 
> block due to M&A continues to be allowed, based on the M&A transfer
> 
> procedures.
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
> 5. Advantages / Disadvantages
> 
> -
> 
>  
> 
> Advantages:
> 
>   - It makes 103/8 blocks available according to the original purpose,
> 
> as distribution for new entrants (rather than being consumed for
> 
> transfer purpose)
> 
>  
> 
>   - IPv4 addresses under final /8 are not transferred to outside APNIC.
> 
>  
> 
>   - By prohibiting transfer them, it is possible to keep one /22 for
> 
> each LIRs state,  which is fair for all LIRs.
> 
>  
> 
> Disadvantages:
> 
>  
> 
> None.
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
> 6. Impact on resource holders
> 
> --
> 
>  
> 
>

Re: [sig-policy] New Policy Proposal prop-116: Prohibit to transfer IPv4 addresses in the final /8 block

[Nitin Sharma]

Hi All,

Why we are so specific (last /8).

As per my view there should be no market transfer other than M&A.

Nitin

On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 12:41 PM, 藤崎智宏  wrote:

> Hi Yu-ya,
>
> Thank you so much for your comment.
>
> Mike also mentioned about M&A in his first mail (thank you, Mike),
> I'll revise my proposal to consider that.
>
> Yours Sincerely,
> ---
> Tomohiro Fujisaki
>
>
> 2016-09-21 9:28 GMT+09:00 Yuya KAWAKAMI :
> > I'd like to support the purpose of this proposal itself but I'm afraid
> that
> > anyone who want to obtain more IPv4 addresses seriously will try to do
> M&A,
> > as Mike mentioned. I wonder if there can be better way to prevent such
> kind
> > of transfer.
> >
> > Paul and George,
> > Thank you for providing helpful statistics!
> >
> > Regards,
> > Yuya
> >
> > On 2016/09/21 05:11, Masato Yamanishi wrote:
> >>
> >> Dear Colleagues,
> >>
> >> Regardding this prop-116, I have not yet seen any support, opposition,
> or
> >> comment, except one clarification made by Mike Jager.
> >> So, let me ask you to express your views for this proposal on the list
> >> more since the meeting is reaching within 2 weeks.
> >>
> >> Mike> Can you advise your opinion for prop-116 after seeing the number
> of
> >> tranfers in 103/8 by market and M&A?
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >> Matt
> >>
> >>
> >> 2016-09-08 15:53 GMT+09:00 George Kuo  >> >:
> >>
> >> Hi Mike,
> >>
> >>
> >> On 7/09/2016 8:09 AM, Mike Jager wrote:
> >>
> >> This proposal does not prohibit transfers due to M&A.
> >> Transfers of 103/8
> >>
> >> block due to M&A continues to be allowed, based on the M&A
> >> transfer
> >>
> >> procedures.
> >>
> >>
> >> I had always assumed that anyone trying to get more than one
> >> allocation of 103/8 was creating a separate entity, obtaining APNIC
> >> membership, receiving the 103/8 allocation, and then using the M&A
> process
> >> to transfer it to their original entity.
> >>
> >> If this is the case, the proposal will be ineffective at
> stopping
> >> this.
> >>
> >> Does APNIC have any information on the relative number of
> >> transfers within 103/8 that have happened as part of M&As?
> >>
> >>
> >> I have included two tables here for your reference. The numbers for
> >> Market transfers are available as part of the public transfer logs.
> >> (ftp://ftp.apnic.net/public/transfers/
> >> )
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> 1) M&A transfers containing 103/8 space
> >>
> >> +--+---+---+-
> >> |  |   Total   | Number of |
> >> | Year | Transfers |   /24s|
> >> +--+---+---+-
> >> | 2011 | 3 | 12 |
> >> | 2012 |10 | 46 |
> >> | 2013 |18 | 66 |
> >> | 2014 |   126 |498 |
> >> | 2015 |   147 |573 |
> >> | 2016 |45 |177 |
> >> +--+---++-
> >>
> >> 2) Market transfers containing 103/8 space
> >>
> >> +--+---+---+
> >> |  |   Total   | Number of |
> >> | Year | Transfers |   /24s|
> >> +--+---+---+
> >> | 2011 | 2 | 2 |
> >> | 2012 |21 |68 |
> >> | 2013 |16 |61 |
> >> | 2014 |25 |95 |
> >> | 2015 |67 |   266 |
> >> | 2016 |56 |   206 |
> >> +--+---+---+
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >>
> >> George K
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Cheers
> >> -Mike
> >> *  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
> >> 
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> *  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
> >>
> >
> >
> > --
> > Yuya KAWAKAMI
> > JPNAP Network/Software Engineer
> > Internet Multifeed Co.
> > +81-3-6262-0960
> > kawak...@mfeed.ad.jp
> >
> >
> > *  sig-policy:  APNIC SIG on resource management policy
> > *
> > ___
> > sig-policy m

Re: [sig-policy] New Policy Proposal prop-116: Prohibit to transfer IPv4 addresses in the final /8 block

[Lu Heng]

Hi

IMHO, doing anything more with the last /8 will only complicated the
situation, maybe, the whole community(not only APNIC, but also RIPE), has
spend too much time and money on this very last piece.

Maybe, get over it, let it depleted naturally, is a better way to go and
save everybody energy as well as time.

Just my 2 cents.

with regards.

Lu

On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 9:23 AM, 藤崎智宏  wrote:

> Hi Aftab,
>
> Thank you for your comment.
>
> 2016-09-21 9:55 GMT+09:00 Aftab Siddiqui :
> > prop-116 is similar to prop-106 with few cosmetic changes so it would be
> > good to review the old discussion.
>
> Yes, the chair said at that time, 'let's see if the problem becomes
> larger or whatever.'
>
> I found many /8 block address were transferred as George kindly provided
> the
> statistics, and also,  /8 blocks were transferred outside APNIC region.
> This is
> because I re-open this issue.
>
> Yours Sincerely,
> ---
> Tomohiro Fujisaki
>
>
> 2016-09-21 9:55 GMT+09:00 Aftab Siddiqui :
> > prop-116 is similar to prop-106 with few cosmetic changes so it would be
> > good to review the old discussion.
> >
> >>
> >> I wonder if there can be better way to prevent such kind of transfer.
> >>
> >
> > Yes, there is a better way, scrap prop-105 and stop handing over
> additional
> > /22 for no reason and add the recovered resources to final /8 pool. Or..
> > Just get over with it :)
> > --
> > 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
> *  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
>



-- 
--
Kind regards.
Lu
*  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] New Policy Proposal prop-116: Prohibit to transfer IPv4 addresses in the final /8 block

[藤崎智宏]

Hi Aftab,

Thank you for your comment.

2016-09-21 9:55 GMT+09:00 Aftab Siddiqui :
> prop-116 is similar to prop-106 with few cosmetic changes so it would be
> good to review the old discussion.

Yes, the chair said at that time, 'let's see if the problem becomes
larger or whatever.'

I found many /8 block address were transferred as George kindly provided the
statistics, and also,  /8 blocks were transferred outside APNIC region. This is
because I re-open this issue.

Yours Sincerely,
---
Tomohiro Fujisaki


2016-09-21 9:55 GMT+09:00 Aftab Siddiqui :
> prop-116 is similar to prop-106 with few cosmetic changes so it would be
> good to review the old discussion.
>
>>
>> I wonder if there can be better way to prevent such kind of transfer.
>>
>
> Yes, there is a better way, scrap prop-105 and stop handing over additional
> /22 for no reason and add the recovered resources to final /8 pool. Or..
> Just get over with it :)
> --
> 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
*  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] New Policy Proposal prop-116: Prohibit to transfer IPv4 addresses in the final /8 block

[藤崎智宏]

Hi Yu-ya,

Thank you so much for your comment.

Mike also mentioned about M&A in his first mail (thank you, Mike),
I'll revise my proposal to consider that.

Yours Sincerely,
---
Tomohiro Fujisaki


2016-09-21 9:28 GMT+09:00 Yuya KAWAKAMI :
> I'd like to support the purpose of this proposal itself but I'm afraid that
> anyone who want to obtain more IPv4 addresses seriously will try to do M&A,
> as Mike mentioned. I wonder if there can be better way to prevent such kind
> of transfer.
>
> Paul and George,
> Thank you for providing helpful statistics!
>
> Regards,
> Yuya
>
> On 2016/09/21 05:11, Masato Yamanishi wrote:
>>
>> Dear Colleagues,
>>
>> Regardding this prop-116, I have not yet seen any support, opposition, or
>> comment, except one clarification made by Mike Jager.
>> So, let me ask you to express your views for this proposal on the list
>> more since the meeting is reaching within 2 weeks.
>>
>> Mike> Can you advise your opinion for prop-116 after seeing the number of
>> tranfers in 103/8 by market and M&A?
>>
>> Regards,
>> Matt
>>
>>
>> 2016-09-08 15:53 GMT+09:00 George Kuo > >:
>>
>> Hi Mike,
>>
>>
>> On 7/09/2016 8:09 AM, Mike Jager wrote:
>>
>> This proposal does not prohibit transfers due to M&A.
>> Transfers of 103/8
>>
>> block due to M&A continues to be allowed, based on the M&A
>> transfer
>>
>> procedures.
>>
>>
>> I had always assumed that anyone trying to get more than one
>> allocation of 103/8 was creating a separate entity, obtaining APNIC
>> membership, receiving the 103/8 allocation, and then using the M&A process
>> to transfer it to their original entity.
>>
>> If this is the case, the proposal will be ineffective at stopping
>> this.
>>
>> Does APNIC have any information on the relative number of
>> transfers within 103/8 that have happened as part of M&As?
>>
>>
>> I have included two tables here for your reference. The numbers for
>> Market transfers are available as part of the public transfer logs.
>> (ftp://ftp.apnic.net/public/transfers/
>> )
>>
>>
>>
>> 1) M&A transfers containing 103/8 space
>>
>> +--+---+---+-
>> |  |   Total   | Number of |
>> | Year | Transfers |   /24s|
>> +--+---+---+-
>> | 2011 | 3 | 12 |
>> | 2012 |10 | 46 |
>> | 2013 |18 | 66 |
>> | 2014 |   126 |498 |
>> | 2015 |   147 |573 |
>> | 2016 |45 |177 |
>> +--+---++-
>>
>> 2) Market transfers containing 103/8 space
>>
>> +--+---+---+
>> |  |   Total   | Number of |
>> | Year | Transfers |   /24s|
>> +--+---+---+
>> | 2011 | 2 | 2 |
>> | 2012 |21 |68 |
>> | 2013 |16 |61 |
>> | 2014 |25 |95 |
>> | 2015 |67 |   266 |
>> | 2016 |56 |   206 |
>> +--+---+---+
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> George K
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Cheers
>> -Mike
>> *  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
>> 
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> *  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
>>
>
>
> --
> Yuya KAWAKAMI
> JPNAP Network/Software Engineer
> Internet Multifeed Co.
> +81-3-6262-0960
> kawak...@mfeed.ad.jp
>
>
> *  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] New Policy Proposal prop-116: Prohibit to transfer IPv4 addresses in the final /8 block [SECURITY=UNCLASSIFIED]

[Elvis Daniel Velea]

hi,

Excuse the briefness of this mail, it was sent from a mobile device.

> On Sep 20, 2016, at 18:40, HENDERSON MIKE, MR  
> wrote:
> 
> “Or.. Just get over with it :)”
> +1
>  

+1

prohibiting the right to transfer resources only by some members (or some 
colors of IP addresses) is, I believe, a very bad idea.

i object to any kind of proposal that wants to block some kind of IP transfers 
but allow others.

/elvis

>  
>  
>  
> Regards
>  
>  
> Mike
>  
> From: sig-policy-boun...@lists.apnic.net 
> [mailto:sig-policy-boun...@lists.apnic.net] On Behalf Of Aftab Siddiqui
> Sent: Wednesday, 21 September 2016 12:55 p.m.
> To: Yuya KAWAKAMI; sig-policy@lists.apnic.net
> Subject: Re: [sig-policy] New Policy Proposal prop-116: Prohibit to transfer 
> IPv4 addresses in the final /8 block
>  
> prop-116 is similar to prop-106 with few cosmetic changes so it would be good 
> to review the old discussion. 
>  
> I wonder if there can be better way to prevent such kind of transfer.
> 
>  
> Yes, there is a better way, scrap prop-105 and stop handing over additional 
> /22 for no reason and add the recovered resources to final /8 pool. Or.. Just 
> get over with it :)  
> --
> Best Wishes,
>  
> Aftab A. Siddiqui
> The information contained in this Internet Email message is intended for the 
> addressee only and may contain privileged information, but not necessarily 
> the official views or opinions of the New Zealand Defence Force.  If you are 
> not the intended recipient you must not use, disclose, copy or 
> distribute this message or the information in it.  If you have received this 
> message in error, please Email or telephone the sender immediately.
> *  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] New Policy Proposal prop-116: Prohibit to transfer IPv4 addresses in the final /8 block [SECURITY=UNCLASSIFIED]

[HENDERSON MIKE, MR]

“Or.. Just get over with it :)”
+1

I think spending time and effort on IPv4 policy is just purposeless.
Realistically, the people who are commercially wedded to that platform will do 
whatever it takes to keep afloat for as long as they can. Trying to make IPv4 
Policy ‘work right’ will be like playing “Whack-a-Mole” as the desperate 
players display every bit of ingenuity and rat cunning they possess to stay in 
the game, until their business model eventually becomes untenable.



Regards


Mike

From: sig-policy-boun...@lists.apnic.net 
[mailto:sig-policy-boun...@lists.apnic.net] On Behalf Of Aftab Siddiqui
Sent: Wednesday, 21 September 2016 12:55 p.m.
To: Yuya KAWAKAMI; sig-policy@lists.apnic.net
Subject: Re: [sig-policy] New Policy Proposal prop-116: Prohibit to transfer 
IPv4 addresses in the final /8 block

prop-116 is similar to prop-106 with few cosmetic changes so it would be good 
to review the old discussion.

I wonder if there can be better way to prevent such kind of transfer.

Yes, there is a better way, scrap prop-105 and stop handing over additional /22 
for no reason and add the recovered resources to final /8 pool. Or.. Just get 
over with it :)
--
Best Wishes,

Aftab A. Siddiqui

The information contained in this Internet Email message is intended
for the addressee only and may contain privileged information, but not
necessarily the official views or opinions of the New Zealand Defence Force.
If you are not the intended recipient you must not use, disclose, copy or 
distribute this message or the information in it.

If you have received this message in error, please Email or telephone
the sender immediately.
*  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] New Policy Proposal prop-116: Prohibit to transfer IPv4 addresses in the final /8 block

[Aftab Siddiqui]

prop-116 is similar to prop-106 with few cosmetic changes so it would be
good to review the old discussion.


> I wonder if there can be better way to prevent such kind of transfer.
>
>
Yes, there is a better way, scrap prop-105 and stop handing over additional
/22 for no reason and add the recovered resources to final /8 pool. Or..
Just get over with it :)
-- 
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] New Policy Proposal prop-116: Prohibit to transfer IPv4 addresses in the final /8 block

[Yuya KAWAKAMI]

I'd like to support the purpose of this proposal itself but I'm afraid that anyone 
who want to obtain more IPv4 addresses seriously will try to do M&A, as Mike 
mentioned. I wonder if there can be better way to prevent such kind of transfer.

Paul and George,
Thank you for providing helpful statistics!

Regards,
Yuya

On 2016/09/21 05:11, Masato Yamanishi wrote:

Dear Colleagues,

Regardding this prop-116, I have not yet seen any support, opposition, or 
comment, except one clarification made by Mike Jager.
So, let me ask you to express your views for this proposal on the list more 
since the meeting is reaching within 2 weeks.

Mike> Can you advise your opinion for prop-116 after seeing the number of tranfers 
in 103/8 by market and M&A?

Regards,
Matt


2016-09-08 15:53 GMT+09:00 George Kuo mailto:geo...@apnic.net>>:

Hi Mike,


On 7/09/2016 8:09 AM, Mike Jager wrote:

This proposal does not prohibit transfers due to M&A. Transfers of 
103/8

block due to M&A continues to be allowed, based on the M&A transfer

procedures.


I had always assumed that anyone trying to get more than one allocation of 
103/8 was creating a separate entity, obtaining APNIC membership, receiving the 
103/8 allocation, and then using the M&A process to transfer it to their 
original entity.

If this is the case, the proposal will be ineffective at stopping this.

Does APNIC have any information on the relative number of transfers within 
103/8 that have happened as part of M&As?


I have included two tables here for your reference. The numbers for Market 
transfers are available as part of the public transfer logs. 
(ftp://ftp.apnic.net/public/transfers/ )


1) M&A transfers containing 103/8 space

+--+---+---+-
|  |   Total   | Number of |
| Year | Transfers |   /24s|
+--+---+---+-
| 2011 | 3 | 12 |
| 2012 |10 | 46 |
| 2013 |18 | 66 |
| 2014 |   126 |498 |
| 2015 |   147 |573 |
| 2016 |45 |177 |
+--+---++-

2) Market transfers containing 103/8 space

+--+---+---+
|  |   Total   | Number of |
| Year | Transfers |   /24s|
+--+---+---+
| 2011 | 2 | 2 |
| 2012 |21 |68 |
| 2013 |16 |61 |
| 2014 |25 |95 |
| 2015 |67 |   266 |
| 2016 |56 |   206 |
+--+---+---+

Thanks,

George K




Cheers
-Mike
*  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 





*  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




--
Yuya KAWAKAMI
JPNAP Network/Software Engineer
Internet Multifeed Co.
+81-3-6262-0960
kawak...@mfeed.ad.jp

*  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] New Policy Proposal prop-116: Prohibit to transfer IPv4 addresses in the final /8 block

[Masato Yamanishi]

Dear Colleagues,

Regardding this prop-116, I have not yet seen any support, opposition, or
comment, except one clarification made by Mike Jager.
So, let me ask you to express your views for this proposal on the list more
since the meeting is reaching within 2 weeks.

Mike> Can you advise your opinion for prop-116 after seeing the number of
tranfers in 103/8 by market and M&A?

Regards,
Matt


2016-09-08 15:53 GMT+09:00 George Kuo :

> Hi Mike,
>
>
> On 7/09/2016 8:09 AM, Mike Jager wrote:
>
>> This proposal does not prohibit transfers due to M&A. Transfers of 103/8
>>>
>>> block due to M&A continues to be allowed, based on the M&A transfer
>>>
>>> procedures.
>>>
>>
>> I had always assumed that anyone trying to get more than one allocation
>> of 103/8 was creating a separate entity, obtaining APNIC membership,
>> receiving the 103/8 allocation, and then using the M&A process to transfer
>> it to their original entity.
>>
>> If this is the case, the proposal will be ineffective at stopping this.
>>
>> Does APNIC have any information on the relative number of transfers
>> within 103/8 that have happened as part of M&As?
>>
>>
> I have included two tables here for your reference. The numbers for Market
> transfers are available as part of the public transfer logs. (
> ftp://ftp.apnic.net/public/transfers/)
>
>
> 1) M&A transfers containing 103/8 space
>
> +--+---+---+-
> |  |   Total   | Number of |
> | Year | Transfers |   /24s|
> +--+---+---+-
> | 2011 | 3 | 12 |
> | 2012 |10 | 46 |
> | 2013 |18 | 66 |
> | 2014 |   126 |498 |
> | 2015 |   147 |573 |
> | 2016 |45 |177 |
> +--+---++-
>
> 2) Market transfers containing 103/8 space
>
> +--+---+---+
> |  |   Total   | Number of |
> | Year | Transfers |   /24s|
> +--+---+---+
> | 2011 | 2 | 2 |
> | 2012 |21 |68 |
> | 2013 |16 |61 |
> | 2014 |25 |95 |
> | 2015 |67 |   266 |
> | 2016 |56 |   206 |
> +--+---+---+
>
> Thanks,
>
> George K
>
>
>
>
> Cheers
>> -Mike
>> *  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
>
*  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] New Policy Proposal prop-116: Prohibit to transfer IPv4 addresses in the final /8 block

[George Kuo]

Hi Mike,


On 7/09/2016 8:09 AM, Mike Jager wrote:

This proposal does not prohibit transfers due to M&A. Transfers of 103/8

block due to M&A continues to be allowed, based on the M&A transfer

procedures.


I had always assumed that anyone trying to get more than one allocation of 103/8 
was creating a separate entity, obtaining APNIC membership, receiving the 103/8 
allocation, and then using the M&A process to transfer it to their original 
entity.

If this is the case, the proposal will be ineffective at stopping this.

Does APNIC have any information on the relative number of transfers within 103/8 
that have happened as part of M&As?



I have included two tables here for your reference. The numbers for 
Market transfers are available as part of the public transfer logs. 
(ftp://ftp.apnic.net/public/transfers/)



1) M&A transfers containing 103/8 space

+--+---+---+-
|  |   Total   | Number of |
| Year | Transfers |   /24s|
+--+---+---+-
| 2011 | 3 | 12 |
| 2012 |10 | 46 |
| 2013 |18 | 66 |
| 2014 |   126 |498 |
| 2015 |   147 |573 |
| 2016 |45 |177 |
+--+---++-

2) Market transfers containing 103/8 space

+--+---+---+
|  |   Total   | Number of |
| Year | Transfers |   /24s|
+--+---+---+
| 2011 | 2 | 2 |
| 2012 |21 |68 |
| 2013 |16 |61 |
| 2014 |25 |95 |
| 2015 |67 |   266 |
| 2016 |56 |   206 |
+--+---+---+

Thanks,

George K





Cheers
-Mike
*  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





smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
*  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] New Policy Proposal prop-116: Prohibit to transfer IPv4 addresses in the final /8 block

[Paul Wilson]

Hi Mike,

We’ll be reporting these figures in detail during APNIC 42.

I’m sure that we can share data here in the meantime, and will do so 
soon.


Paul.


On 7 Sep 2016, at 8:09, Mike Jager wrote:

This proposal does not prohibit transfers due to M&A. Transfers of 
103/8


block due to M&A continues to be allowed, based on the M&A transfer

procedures.


I had always assumed that anyone trying to get more than one 
allocation of 103/8 was creating a separate entity, obtaining APNIC 
membership, receiving the 103/8 allocation, and then using the M&A 
process to transfer it to their original entity.


If this is the case, the proposal will be ineffective at stopping 
this.


Does APNIC have any information on the relative number of transfers 
within 103/8 that have happened as part of M&As?


Cheers
-Mike
*  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] New Policy Proposal prop-116: Prohibit to transfer IPv4 addresses in the final /8 block

[Mike Jager]

> This proposal does not prohibit transfers due to M&A. Transfers of 103/8
> 
> block due to M&A continues to be allowed, based on the M&A transfer
> 
> procedures.

I had always assumed that anyone trying to get more than one allocation of 
103/8 was creating a separate entity, obtaining APNIC membership, receiving the 
103/8 allocation, and then using the M&A process to transfer it to their 
original entity.

If this is the case, the proposal will be ineffective at stopping this.

Does APNIC have any information on the relative number of transfers within 
103/8 that have happened as part of M&As?

Cheers
-Mike
*  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