Hi Ernest,
> I support this proposal but not all of the view. > Thanks for your partial support, I hope I will be able to transform it in full support :) > The point: > The last APNIC 103/8 block is a brand new came from IANA, unused IPv4 > block, and it is never used by other user on the Internet from other RIR. > This SHOULD be the case but unfortunately, it isn't true. Let me explain it why. As I'm writing this email, there are 43 prefixes from 103/8 block on the global routing table which are not allocated to anyone by APNIC. Yes, 43 Bogons from 103/8. All these prefixes are most likely to be allocated to new members in the future. They are "used" and probably "abused" prefixes by all means. [source: cidr-report.org] > The recovered pool IP block is used by other user from other RIR may be. > Same is the case with 103/8 block > If the recovered pool IP will assign to the new member, would it have some > problem when use it ? > All the recovered blocks have the same issues like 103/8. > Best Regards, > > Ernest Tse > > > On Tue, 22/01/2019 08.15, Bertrand Cherrier <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Dear SIG members, > > The proposal "prop-129-v001: Abolish Waiting list for unmet IPv4 > requests" has been sent to the Policy SIG for review. > > It will be presented at the Open Policy Meeting at APNIC 47 in > Daejeon, South Korea on Wednesday, 27 February 2019. > > 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-129 > > Regards > > Sumon, Bertrand, Ching-Heng > APNIC Policy SIG Chairs > ------------------------------ > > prop-129-v001: Abolish Waiting list for unmet IPv4 requests > ------------------------------ > > Proposers: Aftab Siddiqui > [email protected] > 1. Problem Statement > > The current APNIC IPv4 Policy allows each APNIC account holder to receive > up to a /22 from the IPv4 Recovered Pool after they have received a /22 > from > the final /8 pool (103/8). However, the Recovered Pool may not always have > enough resources for delegation, therefore a waiting list was created. The > position of a Member on the waiting list is strictly determined by the date > and time that the Member’s completed request received by APNIC. At the time > of writing, there are 658 members in the waiting list. In 2018, APNIC > received 10 x /24 and 1 x /23 (equal to 3 x /22) from IANA recovered pool. > In the same year, more than 400 members were added to the waiting list > where the majority were requesting for /22. IANA recovered address > delegations > are shrinking to a level where it is impossible to provide IPv4 > resources to > current 658 members in the waiting list. > 2. Objective of policy change > > The objective is to remove the waiting list as the IANA or APNIC > recovered address > space is not enough. All the members in the waiting list already have a > minimum of > /22 address space from last /8 (103/8) address block. Whatever is > recovered by IANA > or by APNIC should be left aside to new members ONLY. > 3. Situation in other regions > > Please correct if otherwise > ARIN - returned and/or recovered address space is added to the ARIN's > free pool > RIPE NCC - returned and/or recovered address space is added to the RIPE > NCC’s free pool > LACNIC - returned and/or recovered address space is added to reserve block > AFRINIC - No Clear > 4. Proposed policy solution > > Abolish the current waiting list and once the APNIC receives IPv4 > recovered address > space from IANA or recovered by themselves (through closures or returns > etc) then > it should be treated under the same policy as last /8 (103/8). > > A waiting list will be created once APNIC runs out of resources in last > /8 and same > last /8 allocation policy will be applied to the waiting list. > 5. Advantages / Disadvantages > > Advantages: > Removing an unnecessary waiting list and able to utilize the recovered > address pool > as part of available IPv4 resources or last /8. > > It will also encourage the waiting list members to implement IPv6. > > Disadvantages: > No disadvantages. > 6. Impact on resource holders > > No impact on existing resource holders. > 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
* sig-policy: APNIC SIG on resource management policy * _______________________________________________ sig-policy mailing list [email protected] https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy
