Dear all , I'm latecomer of the race to get IPv4 . So as a latecomer of the community, may i have a last option or opportunity to get resources ?
According to transfer statistics and member of this community, we are responsible for maintaining the number resources policy and update when needed for the community . *Regards / Jahangir * On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 4:04 PM, Hiroki Kawabata <[email protected]> wrote: > If the current situation of 103/8 distribution is different from the > intention > and concept of prop-062(*) as described in the proposal, I think we need > to discuss it > and revise the policy as necessary. > > (*)103/8 block is intended to accommodate minimum IPv4 address block > for new comers. > > prop-062: Use of final /8 > https://www.apnic.net/policy/proposals/prop-062 > > I think our community is responsible for maintaining the number resources > policy. > Regardless of IPv4 or IPv6, it is not appropriate to leave the policy > untouched, > and not to maintain what we have developed. > > Regards, > Hiroki > > Subject: Re: [sig-policy] New version of prop-116: Prohibit to transfer > IPv4 addresses in the final /8 block (SECURITY=UNCLASSIFIED) > From: Mark Foster <[email protected]> > Date: Tue Sep 27 2016 09:14:57 GMT+0900 > > I agree that there's an element of 'deck chair rearrangement' but it's a >> reality that there is a commercial market for IPv4 and competitive value in >> having addresses available. To simply say 'who cares about IPv4, move on' >> will simply encourage predatory practices. >> >> I have no doubt that the M&A process will be used to abuse the process, >> and believe there needs to be a deterrent to the abuse of the bureaucratic >> process. >> But legitimate M&A needs to be permitted (having had to engage this >> process in the last couple of years due to organisational and commercial >> changes at my then-employer, I wouldn't want to see that process made any >> more complex than necessary). >> >> I think that the modified proposal has merit for that reason, and would >> support it. >> >> Mark. >> >> >> On Tue, Sep 27, 2016 at 8:50 AM, Alastair Johnson <[email protected] <mailto: >> [email protected]>> wrote: >> >> I agree with Mike. I don't support this proposal. >> >> AJ >> >> On Sep 26, 2016, at 2:26 PM, HENDERSON MIKE, MR < >> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> >> wrote: >> >> The objectives of this proposal are laudable, but in my view policy >>> development for IPv4 is just ‘rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic’: >>> a waste of time and effort.____ >>> >>> __ __ >>> >>> __ __ >>> >>> I do *not* support this proposal____ >>> >>> __ __ >>> >>> __ __ >>> >>> Regards____ >>> >>> __ __ >>> >>> __ __ >>> >>> */Mike/*____ >>> >>> __ __ >>> >>> *From:*[email protected] <mailto: >>> [email protected]> [mailto:sig-policy-bounces@lis >>> ts.apnic.net <mailto:[email protected]>] *On Behalf Of >>> *Masato Yamanishi >>> *Sent:* Monday, 26 September 2016 11:06 p.m. >>> *To:* [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> >>> *Subject:* [sig-policy] New version of prop-116: Prohibit to >>> transfer IPv4 addresses in the final /8 block____ >>> >>> __ __ >>> >>> Dear SIG members >>> >>> A new version of the proposal "prop-116: Prohibit to transfer IPv4 >>> addresses in the final /8 block" has been sent to the Policy SIG for >>> review. >>> >>> Information about earlier versions is available from: >>> >>> http://www.apnic.net/policy/proposals/prop-116 < >>> http://www.apnic.net/policy/proposals/prop-116> >>> >>> 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, Sumon >>> >>> ------------------------------------------------------- >>> >>> prop-116-v002: Prohibit to transfer IPv4 addresses in the final /8 >>> block >>> >>> ------------------------------------------------------- >>> >>> Proposer: Tomohiro Fujisaki >>> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> 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. >>> >>> Then number of transfer from 103/8 block are about 200, which is >>> about 12% of the total number of transfers. This looks so hight >>> high, since APNIC manages about 40/8. >>> >>> And based on the information provided by APNIC secretariat, number >>> of transfers from the 103/8 block are increasing year by year. >>> >>> Provided by George Kuo on the sig-policy ML at 8th September 2016: >>> >>> 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 | >>> +------+-----------+-----------+ >>> >>> >>> 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/transfer-resources/transfer-logs < >>> https://www.apnic.net/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 < >>> 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. >>> >>> In the case of transfers due to M&A, merged organization can have >>> up to /22 IPv4 address in the 103/8 block. The 103/8 IPv4 address >>> more than /22 have to return to APNIC to allocate to another >>> organization. >>> >>> >>> 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 >>> ------------------------------ >>> >>> - LIRs cannot transfer address blocks under 103/8. No big impact >>> while >>> they use it. >>> >>> - Organizations which needs to receive transferred IPv4 can >>> continue >>> to do so, outside 103/8 blocks (which should be made available >>> for >>> new entrants) >>> >>> >>> 7. References >>> -------------____ >>> >>> 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 >>> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> >>> https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy < >>> https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy> >>> >> >> * sig-policy: APNIC SIG on resource management policy >> * >> _______________________________________________ >> sig-policy mailing list >> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> >> https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy < >> 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 >> >> * 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
