I oppose this policy.

Any legitimate case for a “temporary transfer” that I can envision would be 
supported through SWIP from an LIR providing services.

Otherwise, this amounts to a lease-style transaction which is most popular when 
related to activities that are generally considered harmful to the internet 
(snowshoe spamming being the most common example).

Owen

> On Aug 9, 2017, at 2:16 AM, 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
> <00.txt>*              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

Reply via email to