Hi Aftab, Thank you for your comment.
2016-09-21 9:55 GMT+09:00 Aftab Siddiqui <[email protected]>: > 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 <[email protected]>: > 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 > [email protected] > https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy * sig-policy: APNIC SIG on resource management policy * _______________________________________________ sig-policy mailing list [email protected] https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy
