I support prop-118, but note that contrary to the proposal text, Lacnic has
allowed intra-regional transfers since March 14, 2016.

Mike Burns

-----Original Message-----
From: sig-policy-boun...@lists.apnic.net
[mailto:sig-policy-boun...@lists.apnic.net] On Behalf Of chku
Sent: Wednesday, August 09, 2017 2:14 AM
To: sig-policy <sig-pol...@apnic.net>
Subject: [sig-policy] [Sig-policy] prop-118: No need policy in APNIC region,
to be dis cussed at APNIC 44 Policy SIG

Dear SIG members

The proposal "prop-118: No need policy in APNIC region" was discussed at
APNIC 43 Policy SIG, but did not reach consensus.

It will be presented at the Open Policy Meeting at APNIC 44 which will be
held in Taichung, Taiwan on Wednesday and Thursday, 14 & 15 September 2017.

Information about the proposal is available from:


You are encouraged to express your views on the proposal:

 - Do you support or oppose the proposal?
 - 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?

Please find the text of the proposal below.

Kind Regards,

Sumon, Bertrand, Ching-Heng
APNIC Policy SIG Chairs


prop-118-v001: No need policy in APNIC region


Proposer:       David Hilario

1. Problem statement

Whenever a transfer of IPv4 is taking place within the APNIC region, the
recipient needs to demonstrate the "need" for the IPv4 space they intend to

Companies transferring IPv4 space to their pool do this in ordcer to enable
further growth in their network, since the space is not coming from the free
public pool, regular policies that are intended to protect the limited pool
of IPv4 space can be removed in transfers.

2. Objective of policy change

Simplify transfer of IPv4 space between resource holders.
Ease some administration on APNIC staff.

3. Situation in other regions

RIPE region has an all around no need policy in IPv4, even for first
allocation, transfers do not require the recipient to demonstrate their
intended use of the resources .

ARIN, need base for both transfers and resources issued by ARIN.

AFRINIC, need based policy on transfers (not active yet) and resource
request from AFRINIC based on needs.

LACNIC, no transfers, need based request.

Out of all these RIR, only ARIN and RIPE NCC have inter-RIR transfer
policies,  ARIN has made clear in the past that the "no need" policy from
the RIPE region would break inter-RIR transfers from ARIN to RIPE region.

4. Proposed policy solution

Simply copy the RIPE policy to solve the ARIN transfer incompatibility:

 - APNIC shall accept all transfers of Internet number resources to its
   service region, provided that they comply with the policies relating
   to transfers within its service region.

 - For transfers from RIR regions that require the receiving region to
   have needs-based policies, recipients must provide a plan to the
   APNIC for the use of at least 50% of the transferred resources within
   5 years.


5. Advantages / Disadvantages


 - Harmonisation with RIPE region.
 - Makes transfer simpler and smoother within APNIC and between APNIC
   and RIPE.
 - maintains a compatibility with ARIN.
 - Removes the uncertainty that a transfer may be rejected based on
   potentially badly documented needs.
 - Lowers the overall administrative burden on APNIC staff.



6. Impact on resource holders

7. References

Sig-policy-chair mailing list

*              sig-policy:  APNIC SIG on resource management policy           *
sig-policy mailing list

Reply via email to