Hi,

Thanks for this data vivek.

On the basis of this I cannot suggest this proposal can be accepted - the
impact is too large.

Certainly we, as a community, and APNIC as a whole, need to look at what
can be done to assist these prefixes coming "into the fold" - but with 581
still with no response, and 175 "not yet done" - the risk of this proposal
having adverse consequences on the routing table is too great.

Andrew


On Fri, 26 Aug 2022 at 17:45, Vivek Nigam <[email protected]> wrote:

> Hi Andrew,
>
>
>
> Please see my responses below.
>
>
>
> > a) the number of legacy resources currently in use (as in, visible in
> the global table), but not yet claimed through this process
>
>
>
> We started this project in February this year and identified 3932
> historical IPv4 prefixes that were not managed under an APNIC account. 885
> of these prefixes are currently visible in the routing table. Following if
> the breakdown of these 885 prefixes.
>
>
>
> Retained by custodian: 81
>
> These prefixes have successfully been claimed and are managed under active
> APNIC accounts now.
>
>
>
> Being claimed by custodian: 175
>
> We are in contact with the potential custodians and they are in the
> process of claiming these prefixes.
>
>
>
> No response: 581
>
> We have sent emails to the custodians but have not got a response as yet.
> We are in the process to find alternate contacts by contacting the ASN
> announcing these prefixes.
>
>
>
> Yet to contact: 44
>
> No valid contact information available in whois. We are in the process to
> look for alternate contacts via publicly available searches as well as
> contacting the ASN announcing these prefixes.
>
>
>
> No longer needed: 4
>
> The custodians have informed us they no longer need these prefixes. We are
> in the process to contact the ASN announcing these prefixes to check why
> they are announcing them.
>
>
>
> > b) the number of legacy resource claims that have been attempted but not
> successfully justified
>
>
>
> So far we have not formally rejected any claims. Where a claimant does not
> provide sufficient information to support their claim, we do not reject the
> claim but rather advise them we will need more information in order to
> properly assess it. We have 3 pending cases where we have requested
> additional supporting information and one case where the custodian has
> refused to setup an APNIC account. We will continue to assist them with
> their claims through the year.
>
>
>
> Thanks
>
> Vivek
>
>
>
> *From: *Srinivas (Sunny) Chendi <[email protected]>
> *Date: *Wednesday, 24 August 2022 at 6:02 pm
> *To: *Andrew Yager <[email protected]>, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ <
> [email protected]>
> *Cc: *[email protected] <[email protected]>
> *Subject: *[sig-policy] Re: prop-147-v001: Historical Resources Management
>
> Dear Andrew,
>
> Thank you for requesting data.
> We will do our best to provide it as soon as possible.
>
> Regards,
> Sunny
> APNIC Secretariat
>
> On 24/08/2022 4:03 pm, Andrew Yager wrote:
>
> Is there any data indicating:
>
>
>
> a) the number of legacy resources currently in use (as in, visible in the
> global table), but not yet claimed through this process
>
> b) the number of legacy resource claims that have been attempted but not
> successfully justified
>
>
>
> I am aware that this has remained a topic of concern for a number of APNIC
> members and technical engineers, and many have been working with APNIC to
> try and resolve resource allocations with various degrees of success.
>
>
>
> Andrew
>
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, 24 Aug 2022 at 09:36, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via sig-policy <
> [email protected]> wrote:
>
> Hi Sunny, all,
>
>
>
> Just summited a new proposal version amending the editorial inputs and
> also adding the following text:
>
> “Furthermore, from 1st January 2023, all historical resources need to be
> maintained in a current APNIC account. In the event of an account closure,
> the historical resource will be placed in a quarantine period and then
> made available for re-delegation similar to current resources.”
>
>
>
> Also, in order to facilitate the job, I agree that will be safer to move
> to a single option with 12 months, so I’ve deleted the “2 choices” in the
> new version.
>
>
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Jordi
>
> @jordipalet
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> El 23/8/22, 6:51, "Srinivas (Sunny) Chendi" <[email protected]> escribió:
>
>
>
> Hi all,
>
> This is the secretariat's impact assessment for prop-147-v001, which is
> also
> available on the proposal page.
>
>     http://www.apnic.net/policy/proposals/prop-147
>
> APNIC understands that this proposal suggests that historical IPv4
> resources be justified and claimed, or that they be made available to other
> organizations that require them.
>
> APNIC also notes the deletion of Section 4.2.1. Recovery of unused
> historical resources. As reported to the community at APNIC 50, this may no
> longer be applicable once the project is completed, possibly by the end of
> 2022.
>
>
> https://conference.apnic.net/50/assets/files/APCS790/Reclaiming-unused-IPv4.pdf
>
> *Recommendations:*
>
> For consistency of language and to align with the current policy document,
> the reference to "available pool" could be changed to "free pool". Also the
> reference to "original resource holder" and "original custodians" could be
> changed to "custodian/s".
>
> Given the number of uncontactable resource holders, the 12-month option
> would be safer for APNIC to implement, as some historical resource holders
> may not be aware of the changes to the treatment of historical resources
> until they are placed into reserved status on January 1, 2023.
>
> *Clarification:*
>
> This proposal only addresses historical resources that have not been
> claimed by January 1st, 2023. It does not specify what happens to the
> historical resources that are claimed, but the Member or Non-Member account
> is not renewed after January 1, 2023. These resources will be considered
> historical and may remain in reserve status indefinitely.
>
> Regards,
> Sunny
> APNIC Secretariat
>
> On 11/08/2022 4:59 pm, chku wrote:
>
> Dear SIG members,
>
>
>
> The proposal "prop-147: Historical Resources Management" has been
>
> sent to the Policy SIG for review.
>
>
>
> It will be presented at the Open Policy Meeting (OPM) at APNIC 54 on
>
> Thursday, 15 September 2022.
>
>
>
>     https://conference.apnic.net/54/program/schedule/#/day/8
>
>
>
> We invite you to review and comment on the proposal on the mailing list
>
> before the OPM.
>
>
>
> The comment period on the mailing list before the OPM is an important
>
> part of the Policy Development Process (PDP). 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 appended below as well as available at:
>
>
>
>     http://www.apnic.net/policy/proposals/prop-147
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Bertrand, Shaila, and Ching-Heng
>
> APNIC Policy SIG Chairs
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
> prop-147-v001: Historical Resources Management
>
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
> Proposer: Jordi Palet Martinez ([email protected])
>
>           Anupam Agrawal ([email protected])
>
>
>
>
>
> 1. Problem statement
>
> --------------------
>
> Section 4.2.1 is outdated and only looking for very old non-routed resources.
>
>
>
> The recent EC resolution (22nd February 2022), imply that historical resource 
> holders in the APNIC region would need to become Members or Non-Members by 
> 1st January 2023 in order to receive registration services. Failing this, 
> historical resource registration will no longer be published in the APNIC 
> Whois Database and said resources will be placed into reserved status.
>
>
>
> Given the continued need for IPv4 addresses, it would seem illogical to keep 
> these unused historical resources in reserve indefinitely. Alternatively, 
> these resources can be used in a way that is sufficiently justified in 
> accordance with existing policies, allowing other organizations to benefit 
> from them during the IPv6 transition.
>
>
>
>
>
> 2. Objective of policy change
>
> -----------------------------
>
> Ensure that historical IPv4 resources are justified and claimed, or that they 
> are available for other organizations that require them.
>
>
>
> If the resources are marked as reserved, the original holders may reclaim 
> them with a valid justification, when APNIC failed to contact them for 
> whatever reason.
>
>
>
> One example of a valid justification is the case where an organization is 
> actually using them internally and there are valid reasons to instead use 
> RFC1918 space, however the space is not routed.
>
>
>
> To give the original resource holders more time to reclaim them, we propose 
> two time-frames for the community discussion and consideration: 6 months and 
> 12 months.
>
>
>
>
>
> 3. Situation in other regions
>
> -----------------------------
>
> In other RIRs legacy resources lose their legacy status when the RSA is 
> signed (upon receiving other resources), so they become under the regular 
> monitoring. In other cases, there is nothing specified by policies.
>
>
>
>
>
> 4. Proposed policy solution
>
> ---------------------------
>
> Proposed policy solution (option 6-months):
>
>
>
> Actual text:
>
> 4.2.1. Recovery of unused historical resources   (remove)
>
> To recover these globally un-routed resources and place them back in the free 
> pool for re-delegation, APNIC will contact networks responsible for 
> historical address space in the APNIC region that has not been globally 
> routed since 1 January 1998.
>
>
>
> To recover un-routed historical AS numbers, APNIC will contact networks 
> responsible for resources not globally used for a reasonable period of time.
>
>
>
> Proposed text:
>
> 4.3. Historical Resources Management
>
> Historical resources that have not been claimed by the original resource 
> holder will be deleted from the APNIC Whois database after 1st January 2023, 
> and marked as reserved.
>
>
>
> Historical resources marked as reserved have an additional six (6) months to 
> be claimed by their original custodians. After that, APNIC will add these 
> resources to the available pool for re-delegation.
>
>
>
> Proposed policy solution (option 12-months):
>
> Actual text:
>
> 4.2.1. Recovery of unused historical resources   (remove)
>
> To recover these globally un-routed resources and place them back in the free 
> pool for re-delegation, APNIC will contact networks responsible for 
> historical address space in the APNIC region that has not been globally 
> routed since 1 January 1998.
>
>
>
> To recover un-routed historical AS numbers, APNIC will contact networks 
> responsible for resources not globally used for a reasonable period of time.
>
>
>
> Proposed text:
>
> 4.3. Historical Resources Management
>
> Historical resources that have not been claimed by the original resource 
> holder will be deleted from the APNIC Whois database after 1st January 2023, 
> and marked as reserved.
>
>
>
> Historical resources marked as reserved have an additional twelve (12) months 
> to be claimed by their original custodians. After that, APNIC will add these 
> resources to the available pool for re-delegation.
>
>
>
>
>
> 5. Advantages / Disadvantages
>
> -----------------------------
>
> Advantages:
>
> Fulfilling the objective above indicated.
>
>
>
> Disadvantages:
>
> None.
>
>
>
>
>
> 6. Impact on resource holders
>
> -----------------------------
>
> None.
>
>
>
>
>
> 7. References
>
> -------------
>
> None.
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> sig-policy - https://mailman.apnic.net/[email protected]/
>
> To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
>
>
>
> --
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
>
>
>
> Srinivas (Sunny) Chendi (he/him)
>
> Senior Advisor - Policy and Community Development
>
>
>
> Asia Pacific Network Information Centre (APNIC) |  Tel: +61 7 3858 3100
>
> PO Box 3646 South Brisbane, QLD 4101 Australia  |  Fax: +61 7 3858 3199
>
> 6 Cordelia Street, South Brisbane, QLD          |  http://www.apnic.net
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
>
>
>
> NOTICE: This email message is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s)
>
> and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized
>
> review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the
>
> intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply email and destroy all
>
> copies of the original message.
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________ sig-policy -
> https://mailman.apnic.net/[email protected]/ To unsubscribe send
> an email to [email protected]
>
>
> **********************************************
> IPv4 is over
> Are you ready for the new Internet ?
> http://www.theipv6company.com
> <https://aus01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.theipv6company.com%2F&data=05%7C01%7C%7C73ddfbf89877403281b708da85a6fadf%7C127d8d0d7ccf473dab096e44ad752ded%7C0%7C0%7C637969249468055548%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=Z7TkQoAtF6hnrTCzUQiJsHk4gdII1TlYSHBueYOSwy4%3D&reserved=0>
> 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 - https://mailman.apnic.net/[email protected]/
> To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
>
>
>
> --
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
>
>
>
> Srinivas (Sunny) Chendi (he/him)
>
> Senior Advisor - Policy and Community Development
>
>
>
> Asia Pacific Network Information Centre (APNIC) |  Tel: +61 7 3858 3100
>
> PO Box 3646 South Brisbane, QLD 4101 Australia  |  Fax: +61 7 3858 3199
>
> 6 Cordelia Street, South Brisbane, QLD          |  http://www.apnic.net
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
>
>
>
> NOTICE: This email message is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s)
>
> and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized
>
> review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the
>
> intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply email and destroy all
>
> copies of the original message.
>
>
>
>
_______________________________________________
sig-policy - https://mailman.apnic.net/[email protected]/
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]

Reply via email to