Thanks for the explanation. Now I have the rationale for this proposal. I can support it.
Kuo Wu Sanjeev Gupta <[email protected]>於 2017年8月18日 週五，11:28寫道： > > > > - Do you support or oppose the proposal? > Mild support. > > > - Do you see any disadvantages in this proposal? > No. > > > - Is there anything in the proposal that is not clear? > No. > > > - What changes could be made to this proposal to make it more effective? > An explicit requirement that the receiving party should be a current APNIC > member > > Overall, I am not clear on how useful or often this will be, but I see no > disadvantages. This will help improve the Whois database, and document > what is currently been done off-books. It improves the paperwork. > > > > -- > Sanjeev Gupta > +65 98551208 http://sg.linkedin.com/in/ghane > > On Wed, Aug 9, 2017 at 2:16 PM, chku <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Dear SIG members >> >> The proposal "prop-119: Temporary transfers" was sent to the Policy SIG >> Mailing list in May 2017. >> >> 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: >> >> http://www.apnic.net/policy/proposals/prop-119 >> >> 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, Ching-Heng, Bertrand >> APNIC Policy SIG Chairs >> >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> >> prop-119-v001: Temporary transfers >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> >> Proposer: David Hilario >> [email protected] >> >> 1. Problem statement >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> >> It is currently not possible for an organisation to receive a temporary >> transfer under the current policy framework. Some organisations do not >> want to have address space registered as assignments or sub-allocations, >> but would rather have the address space registered as "ALLOCATED PA". >> >> >> 2. Objective of policy change >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> >> Create a possibility for temporary transfers that would allow >> organisations to have resources directly registered under them while >> they are the custodians of these resources on the Internet. While also >> guaranteeing that the offering party will under the APNIC policy be able >> to recover the resources once the “lease” time has expired unless >> specifically renewed. >> >> >> 3. Situation in other regions >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> >> RIPE region has a concept of temporary transfers in their policies. This >> concept is not found in the other RIRs for the moment. >> >> >> 4. Proposed policy solution >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> >> Adding to section "8.2.1. Conditions on the space to be transferred" the >> following paragraphs: It must be specified if the transfer is a >> permanent or temporary transfer. >> >> A temporary transfer must have an end date, upon the end date the >> resources will be transferred back to the same origin account or its >> successor in the event of merger and acquisitions, unless the transfer >> is specifically prolonged and confirmed by both parties. >> >> If the source account does no longer exist and has no successor, the >> space will then be returned to the origin RIR for the space. Temporary >> transfers cannot be further transferred. >> >> >> 5. Advantages / Disadvantages >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> >> Advantages: >> Gives a greater flexibility in how LIRs manage and distribute their free >> pool. Enables organisation to receive address space in the way they >> intend. >> >> Disadvantages: >> These transfers would be treated and appear as regular transfers, only >> APNIC the offering and receiving party will be aware of their temporary >> nature. >> >> Organisations receiving such space, if they further assign it, must make >> be ready to renumber/revoke space from their customers and services then >> the lease expires, this is no different than a sub-allocation and >> implies the same limitations. >> >> >> 6. Impact on resource holders >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> none >> >> >> 7. References >> ------------- >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Sig-policy-chair mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy-chair >> >> * 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
