Satoru-san,

Thank you very much for the feedback from the Japanese Open Policy Forum Steering Team, it’s greatly appreciated !

Best Regards,

Cordialement,
___________________________________________
Bertrand Cherrier
Administration Systèmes - R&D
Micro Logic Systems
b.cherr...@micrologic.nc
https://www.mls.nc
Tél : +687 24 99 24
VoIP : 65 24 99 24
SAV : +687 36 67 76 (58F/min)
___________________________________________

On 22 Feb 2019, at 12:29, Satoru Tsurumaki wrote:

Dear Colleagues,

I am Satoru Tsurumaki from Japan Open Policy Forum Steering Team.

I would like to share a feedback in our community for prop-127,
based on a meeting we organized on 12th Feb to discuss these proposals.

Almost half of participants were oppose the proposal and almost other half
ware neutral.
Many opposing comments were expressed with the reasons below:

* I am worried that the change a allocation size and this discussion
will be repeated each time the 103/8 address pool decreases.

* It should be /24 in this time if it will be changed it in the future.

* I'd like to know the reason why "/23", not "/24" or other prefix size.

* /23 seems too small for a newcomer.

* A Newcomer can choose a transfer as a alternative if the proposal not
reach consensus.


Best Regards,

Satoru Tsurumaki
JPOPF-ST

2019年1月18日(金) 15:17 Bertrand Cherrier <b.cherr...@micrologic.nc>:

Dear SIG members,

The proposal "prop-127-v001: Change maximum delegation size of 103/8
IPv4 address pool to a /23" 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-127

Regards

Sumon, Bertrand, Ching-Heng
APNIC Policy SIG Chairs
------------------------------

prop-127-v001: Change maximum delegation size of 103/8 IPv4 address
pool to a /23
------------------------------

Proposers: Ching-Heng Ku, Aftab Siddiqui, Yen-Chieh Wang
c...@twnic.tw
1. Problem Statement

This is a proposal to change the maximum size of IPv4 address delegations
from the APNIC 103/8 IPv4 address pool [1] to a /23.
2. Objective of policy change

The current final /8 allocation policy[1] requires that the current minimum delegation size for IPv4 is a /24 and each APNIC account holder is only
eligible
to receive IPv4 address delegations totalling a maximum /22 from the
APNIC 103/8
IPv4 address pool.

According to the APNIC IPv4 Address Report, https://ipv4.potaroo.net/,
remaining
addresses in the APNIC 103/8 pool are 42.8%, 33.3%, 23.4% of /8 in the
end of
2016, 2017, and 2018, respectively. The remaining number of APNIC 103/8
IPv4
address pool for APNIC account holder is less and less. It is predicted
that
the 103/8 pool will be exhausted in 2020.

Reducing the maximum IPv4 delegation size from APNIC 103/8 IPv4 address
pool can
prolong the exhaustion time of the 103/8. Newcomers of APNIC account
holders will
have the benefit in this period of time. New companies can obtain some
IPv4 address
space in the APNIC service region without the need to trade for address
space and
can make the preparation for the subsequent IPv6 migration.

It is recommended that the number of assigned IPv4 addresses in Final /8
be reduced
from a maximum of /22 to /23. It will be estimated to extend the
exhaustion time
for at least three years or more.
3. Situation in other regions

There is no similar policy in place in other RIR regions.
4. Proposed policy solution

It is proposed to modify the 6.1 Minimum and maximum IPv4 delegations of
the APNIC
Internet Number Resource Policies[1].

This proposal is to change the maximum size of IPv4 address delegations
from the
APNIC 103/8 IPv4 address pool[1] to a /23. /23 is important because new
ISPs can
use /24 for internal infrastructure and /24 customer assignments and NAT
for IPv6
transition.

Current Policy text

Each APNIC account holder is only eligible to receive IPv4 address
delegations
totalling a maximum /22 from the APNIC 103/8 IPv4 address pool.

New Policy text

Each APNIC account holder without APNIC 103/8 IPv4 address delegations
from the
APNIC 103/8 IPv4 address pool is only eligible to receive a maximum /23
from the
APNIC 103/8 IPv4 address pool.
5. Advantages / Disadvantages

Advantages:
- This proposal allows a greater range of networks to access the
resources in
the final /8.

- This proposal extends the maximum possible total number of networks that can benefit from the final /8 pool from around 16,000 to around 18,000 networks, providing small amounts of IPv4 to be available for networks, developing economy, etc., making the transition to IPv6 for many years to
   come.

Disadvantages:
- No disadvantages are foreseen.
6. Impact on resource holders

It reduces the maximum size of the delegated address block available to
APNIC
members during the final /8 phase. This will affect NIR members in the
same way
as APNIC members.
7. References

[1] Section 6.1. "Minimum and maximum IPv4 delegations" of "Policies for
IPv4 address
space management in the Asia Pacific region"
https://www.apnic.net/community/policy/resources#Part-2-IPv4-Policy
*              sig-policy:  APNIC SIG on resource management policy
   *
_______________________________________________
sig-policy mailing list
sig-policy@lists.apnic.net
https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy


* sig-policy: APNIC SIG on resource management policy *
_______________________________________________
sig-policy mailing list
sig-policy@lists.apnic.net
https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy
*              sig-policy:  APNIC SIG on resource management policy           *
_______________________________________________
sig-policy mailing list
sig-policy@lists.apnic.net
https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy

Reply via email to