Hi APNIC Secretariat How many transfers will be affected by prop-116-v006, since 14th Sep 2017 ?
Regards Muhammad Yasir Shamim -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of [email protected] Sent: Monday, January 29, 2018 1:13 PM To: [email protected] Subject: sig-policy Digest, Vol 164, Issue 8 Send sig-policy mailing list submissions to [email protected] To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to [email protected] You can reach the person managing the list at [email protected] When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of sig-policy digest..." Today's Topics: 1. Re: prop-123-v001: Modify 103/8 IPv4 transfer policy (Rajesh Panwala) 2. sig-policy Digest, Vol 164, Issue 7 (Yasir Shamim, Muhammad) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2018 13:33:57 +0530 From: Rajesh Panwala <[email protected]> To: Sanjeev Gupta <[email protected]> Cc: sig-policy <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [sig-policy] prop-123-v001: Modify 103/8 IPv4 transfer policy Message-ID: <caftveg6qvzwz59-iz2zhbcamir0tttxzf53zdkyf0c8o34p...@mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Dear Team, My submission is " All M&A cases should be excluded from denying the transfer." As M&A is routine business activity, there is no point barring transfer. regards, Rajesh Panwala For Smartlink Solutions Pvt. Ltd. +91-9227886001 On Mon, Jan 29, 2018 at 12:04 PM, Sanjeev Gupta <[email protected]> wrote: > Rajesh, the issue will be that the Secretariat has to be given a clear > definition of "genuine". It is unfair to them to expect that they > administer a rule which is not well defined. > > Putting a date makes life clear (not better, but clear). > > > -- > Sanjeev Gupta > +65 98551208 http://sg.linkedin.com/in/ghane > > On Mon, Jan 29, 2018 at 1:52 PM, Rajesh Panwala > <[email protected] > > wrote: > >> I partially support the policy. For genuine M&A cases , there should >> not be any restriction on transfer of resources. M&A activities are >> part and parcel of routine business and no one knows when will it take place. >> >> regards, >> >> Rajesh Panwala >> For Smartlink Solutions Pvt. Ltd. >> +91-9227886001 <+91%2092278%2086001> >> >> On Fri, Jan 26, 2018 at 8:57 AM, Bertrand Cherrier < >> [email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Dear SIG members, >>> >>> The proposal "prop-123-v001: Modify 103/8 IPv4 transfer policy" has >>> been sent to the Policy SIG for review. >>> >>> It will be presented at the Open Policy Meeting at APNIC 45 in >>> Kathmandu, Nepal on Tuesday, 27 February 2018. >>> >>> We invite you to review and comment on the proposal on the mailing >>> list before the meeting. >>> >>> The comment period on the mailing list before an APNIC meeting is an >>> important part of the policy development process. We encourage you >>> to express your views on the proposal: >>> >>> - Do you support or oppose this proposal? >>> - Does this proposal solve a problem you are experiencing? If so, >>> tell the community about your situation. >>> - 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? >>> >>> Information about this proposal is available at: >>> >>> http://www.apnic.net/policy/proposals/prop-123 >>> >>> Regards >>> >>> Sumon, Bertrand, Ching-Heng >>> APNIC Policy SIG Chairs >>> >>> https://www.apnic.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/prop-123-v001.txt >>> >>> ------------------------------------------------------- >>> >>> prop-123-v001: Modify 103/8 IPv4 transfer policy >>> >>> ------------------------------------------------------- >>> >>> Proposer: Alex Yang >>> [email protected] >>> >>> >>> 1. Problem statement >>> ------------------------------------------------------- >>> >>> Policy Proposal prop-116-v006: Prohibit to transfer IPv4 addresses >>> in the final /8 block reached consensus at the APNIC 44 AMM on 14 >>> Sep 2017. Since that APNIC has stopped all the IPv4 transfers from >>> 103/8 block if the delegation date is less than 5 years. >>> >>> However, some of the 103/8 ranges were delegated before 14 Sep 2017. >>> Those resources should not be subjected to 5 years restriction. The >>> community was not aware of the restriction when they received those >>> resources, some of the resources have been transferred or planning >>> to transfer. If APNIC is not allow those transfers to be registered, >>> there will be underground transfers. This will cause incorrect APNIC >>> Whois data. >>> >>> >>> 2. Objective of policy change >>> ------------------------------------------------------- >>> >>> To keep the APNIC Whois data correct. >>> >>> >>> 3. Situation in other regions >>> ------------------------------------------------------- >>> >>> No such situation in other regions. >>> >>> >>> 4. Proposed policy solution >>> ------------------------------------------------------- >>> >>> ?Prohibit transfer IPv4 addresses under final /8 address block >>> (103/8) which have not passed five years after its allocation/assignment? >>> should only apply to those ranges were delegated from APNIC since 14 >>> Sep 2017. >>> >>> >>> 5. Advantages / Disadvantages >>> ------------------------------------------------------- >>> >>> Advantages: >>> >>> - Allow APNIC to register those 103/8 transfers to keep the APNIC >>> Whois data correct. >>> >>> >>> Disadvantages: >>> >>> None. >>> >>> >>> 6. Impact on resource holders >>> ------------------------------------------------------- >>> >>> Resource holders are allowed to transfer 103/8 ranges if the >>> resources were delegated before 14 Sep 2017. >>> >>> >>> >>> 7. References >>> ------------------------------------------------------- >>> >>> >>> * 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 >> > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://mailman.apnic.net/mailing-lists/sig-policy/attachments/20180129/13c4 1d4f/attachment.html> ------------------------------ Message: 2 Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2018 13:12:33 +0500 From: "Yasir Shamim, Muhammad" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Subject: [sig-policy] sig-policy Digest, Vol 164, Issue 7 Message-ID: <[email protected]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Hi APNIC Secretariat How many transfers will be affected by prop-116-v006, since 14th Sep 2017 ? Regards Muhammad Yasir Shamim -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of [email protected] Sent: Monday, January 29, 2018 11:44 AM To: [email protected] Subject: sig-policy Digest, Vol 164, Issue 7 Send sig-policy mailing list submissions to [email protected] To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to [email protected] You can reach the person managing the list at [email protected] When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of sig-policy digest..." Today's Topics: 1. Re: prop-123-v001: Modify 103/8 IPv4 transfer policy (Sanjeev Gupta) 2. Re: prop-123-v001: Modify 103/8 IPv4 transfer policy [SECURITY=UNCLASSIFIED] (Guangliang Pan) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2018 14:34:02 +0800 From: Sanjeev Gupta <[email protected]> To: Rajesh Panwala <[email protected]> Cc: sig-policy <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [sig-policy] prop-123-v001: Modify 103/8 IPv4 transfer policy Message-ID: <cabd+escslc18gzbmes0wsjusxbtkelky5tom8qfg5epo9fv...@mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Rajesh, the issue will be that the Secretariat has to be given a clear definition of "genuine". It is unfair to them to expect that they administer a rule which is not well defined. Putting a date makes life clear (not better, but clear). -- Sanjeev Gupta +65 98551208 http://sg.linkedin.com/in/ghane On Mon, Jan 29, 2018 at 1:52 PM, Rajesh Panwala <[email protected]> wrote: > I partially support the policy. For genuine M&A cases , there should > not be any restriction on transfer of resources. M&A activities are > part and parcel of routine business and no one knows when will it take place. > > regards, > > Rajesh Panwala > For Smartlink Solutions Pvt. Ltd. > +91-9227886001 <+91%2092278%2086001> > > On Fri, Jan 26, 2018 at 8:57 AM, Bertrand Cherrier < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> Dear SIG members, >> >> The proposal "prop-123-v001: Modify 103/8 IPv4 transfer policy" has >> been sent to the Policy SIG for review. >> >> It will be presented at the Open Policy Meeting at APNIC 45 in >> Kathmandu, Nepal on Tuesday, 27 February 2018. >> >> We invite you to review and comment on the proposal on the mailing >> list before the meeting. >> >> The comment period on the mailing list before an APNIC meeting is an >> important part of the policy development process. We encourage you to >> express your views on the proposal: >> >> - Do you support or oppose this proposal? >> - Does this proposal solve a problem you are experiencing? If so, >> tell the community about your situation. >> - 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? >> >> Information about this proposal is available at: >> >> http://www.apnic.net/policy/proposals/prop-123 >> >> Regards >> >> Sumon, Bertrand, Ching-Heng >> APNIC Policy SIG Chairs >> >> https://www.apnic.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/prop-123-v001.txt >> >> ------------------------------------------------------- >> >> prop-123-v001: Modify 103/8 IPv4 transfer policy >> >> ------------------------------------------------------- >> >> Proposer: Alex Yang >> [email protected] >> >> >> 1. Problem statement >> ------------------------------------------------------- >> >> Policy Proposal prop-116-v006: Prohibit to transfer IPv4 addresses in >> the final /8 block reached consensus at the APNIC 44 AMM on 14 Sep >> 2017. Since that APNIC has stopped all the IPv4 transfers from 103/8 >> block if the delegation date is less than 5 years. >> >> However, some of the 103/8 ranges were delegated before 14 Sep 2017. >> Those resources should not be subjected to 5 years restriction. The >> community was not aware of the restriction when they received those >> resources, some of the resources have been transferred or planning to >> transfer. If APNIC is not allow those transfers to be registered, >> there will be underground transfers. This will cause incorrect APNIC >> Whois data. >> >> >> 2. Objective of policy change >> ------------------------------------------------------- >> >> To keep the APNIC Whois data correct. >> >> >> 3. Situation in other regions >> ------------------------------------------------------- >> >> No such situation in other regions. >> >> >> 4. Proposed policy solution >> ------------------------------------------------------- >> >> ?Prohibit transfer IPv4 addresses under final /8 address block >> (103/8) which have not passed five years after its allocation/assignment? >> should only apply to those ranges were delegated from APNIC since 14 >> Sep 2017. >> >> >> 5. Advantages / Disadvantages >> ------------------------------------------------------- >> >> Advantages: >> >> - Allow APNIC to register those 103/8 transfers to keep the APNIC >> Whois data correct. >> >> >> Disadvantages: >> >> None. >> >> >> 6. Impact on resource holders >> ------------------------------------------------------- >> >> Resource holders are allowed to transfer 103/8 ranges if the >> resources were delegated before 14 Sep 2017. >> >> >> >> 7. References >> ------------------------------------------------------- >> >> >> * 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 > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://mailman.apnic.net/mailing-lists/sig-policy/attachments/20180129/beae 47c4/attachment.html> ------------------------------ Message: 2 Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2018 06:43:36 +0000 From: Guangliang Pan <[email protected]> To: Sanjeev Gupta <[email protected]> Cc: mailman_SIG-policy <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [sig-policy] prop-123-v001: Modify 103/8 IPv4 transfer policy [SECURITY=UNCLASSIFIED] Message-ID: <sg2pr04mb1613124f00aa3b87fb48e674c6...@sg2pr04mb1613.apcprd04.prod.outlook. com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Hi Sanjeev, The number of delegations from 103/8 pool since 29 Jan 2013 (Five years count back from today) to 14 Sep 2017 is 10868. These are the delegations are not allowed to transfer as of today according to prop-116-v006. Kind regards, Guangliang ========= From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Sanjeev Gupta Sent: Monday, 29 January 2018 3:34 PM To: Henderson Mike, Mr <[email protected]> Cc: mailman_SIG-policy <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [sig-policy] prop-123-v001: Modify 103/8 IPv4 transfer policy [SECURITY=UNCLASSIFIED] Hi, I see this as more of a "do not make policy retroactively". People who "bought" an "asset" in good faith should not be told it is worth different now. I am amenable to changing the cut-off date in Prop-123 to the date it was sent to the Policy SIG, as that might have given warning to people the rules were changing. APNIC Secretariat, how many transfers will be affected by Prop-123? -- Sanjeev Gupta +65 98551208 http://sg.linkedin.com/in/ghane On Mon, Jan 29, 2018 at 4:16 AM, Henderson Mike, Mr <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: Not supported The proposal should in my opinion be amended to read: ___________________________ Disadvantages: None Completely negates the purpose of prop-116-v006: Prohibit to transfer IPv4 addresses in the final /8 block. ___________________________ Regards Mike From: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected] > [mailto:[email protected]<mailto:[email protected] pnic.net>] On Behalf Of Bertrand Cherrier Sent: Friday, 26 January 2018 4:28 p.m. To: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> Subject: [sig-policy] prop-123-v001: Modify 103/8 IPv4 transfer policy Dear SIG members, The proposal "prop-123-v001: Modify 103/8 IPv4 transfer policy" has been sent to the Policy SIG for review. It will be presented at the Open Policy Meeting at APNIC 45 in Kathmandu, Nepal on Tuesday, 27 February 2018. We invite you to review and comment on the proposal on the mailing list before the meeting. The comment period on the mailing list before an APNIC meeting is an important part of the policy development process. We encourage you to express your views on the proposal: - Do you support or oppose this proposal? - Does this proposal solve a problem you are experiencing? If so, tell the community about your situation. - 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? Information about this proposal is available at: http://www.apnic.net/policy/proposals/prop-123 Regards Sumon, Bertrand, Ching-Heng APNIC Policy SIG Chairs https://www.apnic.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/prop-123-v001.txt ------------------------------------------------------- prop-123-v001: Modify 103/8 IPv4 transfer policy ------------------------------------------------------- Proposer: Alex Yang [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> 1. Problem statement ------------------------------------------------------- Policy Proposal prop-116-v006: Prohibit to transfer IPv4 addresses in the final /8 block reached consensus at the APNIC 44 AMM on 14 Sep 2017. Since that APNIC has stopped all the IPv4 transfers from 103/8 block if the delegation date is less than 5 years. However, some of the 103/8 ranges were delegated before 14 Sep 2017. Those resources should not be subjected to 5 years restriction. The community was not aware of the restriction when they received those resources, some of the resources have been transferred or planning to transfer. If APNIC is not allow those transfers to be registered, there will be underground transfers. This will cause incorrect APNIC Whois data. 2. Objective of policy change ------------------------------------------------------- To keep the APNIC Whois data correct. 3. Situation in other regions ------------------------------------------------------- No such situation in other regions. 4. Proposed policy solution ------------------------------------------------------- ?Prohibit transfer IPv4 addresses under final /8 address block (103/8) which have not passed five years after its allocation/assignment? should only apply to those ranges were delegated from APNIC since 14 Sep 2017. 5. Advantages / Disadvantages ------------------------------------------------------- Advantages: - Allow APNIC to register those 103/8 transfers to keep the APNIC Whois data correct. Disadvantages: None. 6. Impact on resource holders ------------------------------------------------------- Resource holders are allowed to transfer 103/8 ranges if the resources were delegated before 14 Sep 2017. 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 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://mailman.apnic.net/mailing-lists/sig-policy/attachments/20180129/5e7d 7541/attachment.html> ------------------------------ _______________________________________________ sig-policy mailing list [email protected] https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy End of sig-policy Digest, Vol 164, Issue 7 ****************************************** --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus ------------------------------ _______________________________________________ sig-policy mailing list [email protected] https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy End of sig-policy Digest, Vol 164, Issue 8 ****************************************** * sig-policy: APNIC SIG on resource management policy * _______________________________________________ sig-policy mailing list [email protected] https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy
