-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 support.
- -gaurab On 3/6/15 12:14 AM, Masato Yamanishi wrote: > Dear SIG members > > A new version of the proposal “prop-113: Modification in the IPv4 > eligibility criteria" has been sent to the Policy SIG for review. > > Information about earlier versions is available from: > > http://www.apnic.net/policy/proposals/prop-113 > > 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, > > Masato > > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > 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. > > > * 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) iEYEARECAAYFAlT5AQEACgkQSo7fU26F3X2aowCg9jHA7f08gLF+GTLURLTf6hcu pj4AoIvviLI3yBJpNVo3OMBRzd3jqYGU =ZxE7 -----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
