Dear Team, I also support Mr. Ajay. For M&A one can't predict. Policy should accomodate M&A cases.
Rajesh Panwala On 12-Sep-2017 10:04 AM, "Ajai Kumar" <[email protected]> wrote: > Dear Policy chair, > I personally partial support if M& A case be excluded as no one knows when > M&A case can come into picture looking at the business of company. > Regards, > Ajai Kumar > > > On 8 September 2017 at 14:31, Satoru Tsurumaki < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> Dear Colleagues, >> >> >> I am Satoru Tsurumaki from Policy Working Group in Japan. >> >> I would like to share key feedback in our community for prop-116, >> based on a meeting we organised on 5th Sep to discuss these proposals. >> >> >> Substantial support expressed for the proposal with reasons below. >> >> * Transfer of 103/8 block is against the original intention of the >> final /8 policy (103/8). >> >> * Given the purpose of 103/8 block distribution is to make the minimum >> IPv4 address block available until transition to IPv6, it may even be >> unnecessary to set the limit of "two years" to prohibit the transfer. >> >> >> Best Regards, >> >> Satoru Tsurumaki >> Policy Working Group >> Japan Open Policy Forum >> >> >> 2017-08-09 15:12 GMT+09:00 chku <[email protected]>: >> > 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. >> > >> > 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 earlier versions is available from: >> > >> > 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? >> > - 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-116-v004: Prohibit to transfer IPv4 addresses in the final /8 block >> > >> > ------------------------------------------------------- >> > >> > Proposer: Tomohiro Fujisaki >> > [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 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. >> > >> > Updated by APNIC Secretariat on 27 January 2017: >> > >> > 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 | 63 | 239 | >> > | 2017 | 45 | 178 | >> > +------+-----------+------------+- >> > >> > 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 | 103 | 394 | >> > | 2017 | 70 | 288 | >> > +------+-----------+-----------+ >> > >> > 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 >> > >> > 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 >> > >> > >> > 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 >> > ----------------------------- >> > >> > None. >> > >> > >> > 4. Proposed policy solution >> > --------------------------- >> > >> > Prohibit transfer IPv4 addresses under /8 address block (103/8) which >> > have not passed two years after its allocation/assignment. If the >> > address block allocated to a LIR in two years is not needed any more, it >> > must return to APNIC to allocate to another organization using final /8 >> > policy. This two years requirement will apply both market and M&A >> > transfers. >> > >> > 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 >> > ------------- >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > 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 >> > > > > -- > > (M) +91-9868477444 > Skype ID:erajay > P-mail: joinajay1 at gmail.com > ................................. > Please don't print this email unless you really need to. This will > preserve trees on our planet. > > * 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
