Hi Jordi, While I do support the need for temporary transfers (as this would ease management of these resources), unfortunately I do not support this proposal as it is currently written.
While there is a potential benefit for temporary transfers to be made, unless a minimum transfer period were to be committed to, this could cause substantial work for the Secretariat in managing these transfers. I believe that as part of this proposal (at the very least) a minimum temporary transfer period of 6 months should be applied. This would at least reduce the work for the Secretariat in processing the transfer then having to potentially transfer it back a month or two later. I dare say the Secretariat impact assessment would shed some more light on this. It may also be worthwhile to consider the number of transfers between the same members, and setting a maximum time period for which a transfer may be made. If the idea of this policy proposal is to assist with transitioning to a native IPv6-only network (which appears to be the case) then I would suggest adding a maximum transfer period of 2-3 years and a maximum of one transfer of upto a /22 v4 prefix in order to prevent it from possibly being misused. Finally, I would also restrict the use of this policy to members who already hold prefixes no shorter than a /22 v4 and obtained them no earlier than 2 years prior to their application for a temporary transfer. I believe the member would have had sufficient time to commence planning a transition to an IPv6-only network. I'm open to discussions and thoughts on these. Regards, Christopher H. _______________________________________________ SIG-policy - https://mailman.apnic.net/[email protected]/ To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
