Hi Christopher,

My responses below, in-line.

Regards,
Jordi

@jordipalet


> El 14 dic 2023, a las 9:50, Christopher Hawker <[email protected]> 
> escribió:
> 
> 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.

[Jordi] There are transfers fees that in one side, cover the work-load done by 
the staff, and the EC could set specific temporary transfer fees if this 
becomes a problem. I understand this is the case as the secretariat impact 
analysis didn’t mention this as a possible issue. On the other side, I think 
most of the transfers could be for several months, or even 1-2 years, because 
my perspective is that it becomes relevant for the transition and it is 
something generally not done in a couple of months, but I don’t see the need to 
restrict other cases. For example, if a conference organizer or a big temporary 
setup needs the addresses for just one month, why not? Enforcing 3 or 6 months 
minimum period, will mean that those addresses can’t be used for the rest of 
the actual required time by other possible recipients.

> 
> 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.

Similar response. I agree that in most cases, it will become a 1-2 or even 3 
years period, but why restricting special cases that may need more?  The 
proposal already restricts it to a maximum /22, so I can’t see the misuse that 
you mention. May be you can explain it? 


> 
> 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’ve seen, worldwide, many cases where members with shorter IPv4 prefixes, even 
obtained recently, didn’t plan correctly and timely for the transition, because 
they didn’t forecasted well their expected growth, etc., so I don’t think that 
will be good.

> 
> 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]


**********************************************
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 - https://mailman.apnic.net/[email protected]/
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]

Reply via email to