Hi Jordi, Thanks for your patience with this.
We have some stats (from the last 15 years) for members with ISP industry type who have received at least one portable IPv4 allocation and IPv6 assignment: 2005: 1 2008: 2 2011: 2 2012: 1 2013: 4 2014: 8 2015: 3 2016: 13 2017: 12 2018: 13 2019: 102 2020: 28 Total: 189 For most multihoming IPv4/PI IPv6 assignments, we mainly assess the policy criteria and don't always ask what they will use the assignment for. Members who have both allocation and assignment could have taken the 'one-click' IPv6 assignment via MyAPNIC and again we won't know for sure why they took the assignment option. I hope this helps. Regards, _______________________________________________________ George Odagi Internet Resource Analyst/Policy Support, APNIC e: [email protected] p: +61 7 3858 3188 f: +61 7 3858 3199 www.apnic.net _______________________________________________________ Join the conversation: https://blog.apnic.net/ On 4/3/20, 4:19 pm, "[email protected] on behalf of George Odagi" <[email protected] on behalf of [email protected]> wrote: Hi Jordi, Generally speaking - when a LIR (such as an ISP) receives an allocation, they can use those IPs for their infrastructure as well as for their customers. While most LIRs do this, we have received IP assignment requests for reasons such as multihoming their new POPs. Once we make an IP assignment to an LIR or an end-user, we expect them to use that assignment for the purpose it was delegated. Provided those IPs are being routed, we consider them being used for the purpose it was delegated. The data you have requested is not readily available and we will need more time to look into it. APNIC Secretariat will share this soon. Regards, _______________________________________________________ George Odagi Internet Resource Analyst/Policy Support, APNIC e: [email protected] p: +61 7 3858 3188 f: +61 7 3858 3199 www.apnic.net _______________________________________________________ Join the conversation: https://blog.apnic.net/ On 26/2/20, 5:35 pm, "[email protected] on behalf of JORDI PALET MARTINEZ" <[email protected] on behalf of [email protected]> wrote: Hi Sunny, I'm mainly interested in the assignments to ISP infrastructure, as the others are different cases, and clearly are "end-users". The point is to understand if there is really a need for ISPs to get additional assignments, why they can't do it already from their own allocation. Any indication of the tendency for those cases (assignments for ISP infrastructure), I mean if this was in an early stage and the is going up or going down? What specific text of the policy or guidelines is "being" used to do that? Regards, Jordi @jordipalet El 26/2/20 4:18, "Srinivas Chendi" <[email protected]> escribió: Hi Jordi, On 24/02/2020 1:39 pm, Srinivas (Sunny) Chendi wrote: >> >> One more request for the secretariat. Could you please provide stats >> on the number of ISP (not end-users) assignments, for example in the >> last 12-15 years, in order to understand if this is a real requirement? > > Noted! Secretariat will provide the stats soon. > > Regards > Sunny To date we have delegated portable assignments to 547 ISPs. Some common reasons for this include: - Assignment to operate IXP - Historical Resource assignments - M&A of members who held assignments - Assignment for ISP infrastructure Regards Sunny ********************************************** IPv4 is over Are you ready for the new Internet ? http://www.theipv6company.com The IPv6 Company This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or confidential. The information is intended to be for the exclusive use of the individual(s) named above and further non-explicilty authorized disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited and will be considered a criminal offense. If you are not the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited, will be considered a criminal offense, so you must reply to the original sender to inform about this communication and delete it. * 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
