-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

With the 'non-removal' of the needs assessment, I am happy to support
this proposal.

thanks
 -gaurab




On 3/5/15 4:50 AM, Skeeve Stevens wrote:
> The only addition to this text was the clarification of
> demonstrated need.  It is not being removed and will remain in
> place as below.
> 
> "Organizations requesting a delegation under these terms must 
> demonstrate that they are able to use 25% of the requested
> addresses immediately and 50% within one year."
> 
> =====
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> prop-113-v003: Modification in the IPv4 eligibility criteria
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> 
> Proposer:      Aftab Siddiqui
> 
> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
> 
> 
> Skeeve Stevens
> 
> [email protected] 
> <mailto:[email protected]>
> 
> 
> 
> 1. Problem statement
> 
> --------------------
> 
> 
> The current APNIC IPv4 delegation policy defines multiple
> eligibility criteria and applicants must meet one criteria to be
> eligible to receive IPv4 resources. One of the criteria dictates
> that “an organization is eligible if it is currently multi-homed
> with provider-based addresses, or demonstrates a plan to multi-home
> within one month” (section 3.3).
> 
> 
> The policy seems to imply that multi-homing is mandatory even if
> there is no use case for the applicant to be multi-homed or even
> when there is only one upstream provider available, this has
> created much confusion in interpreting this policy.
> 
> 
> As a result organizations have either tempted to provide incorrect
> or fabricated multi-homing information to get the IPv4 resources or
> barred themselves from applying.
> 
> 
> 
> 2. Objective of policy change
> 
> -----------------------------
> 
> 
> In order to make the policy guidelines simpler we are proposing to 
> modify the text of section 3.3.
> 
> 
> 
> 3. Situation in other regions
> 
> -----------------------------
> 
> 
> ARIN:
> 
> There is no multi-homing requirement
> 
> 
> RIPE:
> 
> There is no multi-homing requirement.
> 
> 
> LACNIC:
> 
> Applicant can either have multi-homing requirement or
> interconnect.
> 
> 
> AFRINIC:
> 
> There is no multi-homing requirement.
> 
> 
> 
> 4. Proposed policy solution
> 
> ---------------------------
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Section 3.3: Criteria for small delegations
> 
> 
> An organization is eligible if:
> 
> 
> *
> 
> it is currently multi-homed OR
> 
> 
> *
> 
> currently utilising provider (ISP) assignment of at least a /24,
> AND intends to be multi-homed OR
> 
> 
> *
> 
> intends to be multi-homed
> 
> 
> AND
> 
> 
> *
> 
> advertise the prefixes within 6 months
> 
> 
> Organizations requesting a delegation under these terms must
> demonstrate that they are able to use 25% of the requested
> addresses immediately and 50% within one year.
> 
> 
> 5. Advantages / Disadvantages
> 
> -----------------------------
> 
> 
> Advantages:
> 
> 
> Simplifies the process of applying for IPv4 address space for
> small delegations and delays the immediate requirement for
> multi-homing as determined to be appropriate within the timeframe
> as detailed in Section 3.3.
> 
> 
> 
> Disadvantages:
> 
> 
> There is no known disadvantage of this proposal.
> 
> 
> 
> 6. Impact on resource holders
> 
> -----------------------------
> 
> 
> No impact on existing resource holders.
> 
> 
> 
> 7. References
> 
> -------------
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ...Skeeve
> 
> *Skeeve Stevens - Senior IP Broker* *v4Now - *an eintellego
> Networks service [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> ;
> www.v4now.com <http://www.v4now.com/>
> 
> Phone: 1300 239 038; Cell +61 (0)414 753 383 ; skype://skeeve
> 
> facebook.com/v4now <http://facebook.com/v4now> ;
> <http://twitter.com/networkceoau>linkedin.com/in/skeeve 
> <http://linkedin.com/in/skeeve>
> 
> twitter.com/theispguy <http://twitter.com/theispguy> ; blog:
> www.theispguy.com <http://www.theispguy.com/>
> 
> 
> IP Address Brokering - Introducing sellers and buyers
> 
> 
> *              sig-policy:  APNIC SIG on resource management policy
> * _______________________________________________ sig-policy
> mailing list [email protected] 
> http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy
> 


- -- 

http://www.gaurab.org.np/


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.22 (Darwin)

iEYEARECAAYFAlT36RYACgkQSo7fU26F3X2XUACgi8eS4uSMM+2WnU+ZoWH6L+jA
fGgAoOUDkwgzOLb2CYtHRsH2Unx3pBXv
=HrSm
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
*              sig-policy:  APNIC SIG on resource management policy           *
_______________________________________________
sig-policy mailing list
[email protected]
http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy

Reply via email to