We support this policy change for organisations that presently only hold a /23
and pay the same rates as those holding a /22. It seems silly that it's taken
APNIC this long to produce such a sensible policy. We implore the passing of
this policy to increase maximum IPv4 delegations to /22.
Regards,
Michael Williams
*Michael B. Williams*
Glexia - An IT Company
Book a Meeting With Me ( https://calendly.com/glexia-michael-williams )
USA Direct: +1 978 477 6797
USA Toll Free: +1 800 675 0297 x101
AUS Direct: +61 3 8594 2265
AUS Toll Free: +61 1800 931 724 x101
Fax: +1.815-301-5570
[email protected]
[email protected] (High-Security Correspondence)
https://www.glexia.com/
Legal Notice:
The information in this electronic mail message is the sender's confidential
business and may be legally privileged. It is intended solely for the
addressee(s). Access to this internet electronic mail message by anyone else is
unauthorized. If you are not the intended recipient, any disclosure, copying,
distribution or any action taken or omitted to be taken in reliance on it is
prohibited and may be unlawful.
On Wed, Jan 28, 2026 at 22:11:20, Satoru Tsurumaki < [email protected] > wrote:
>
>
>
> Dear Colleagues,
>
>
>
> I am Satoru Tsurumaki from Japan Open Policy Forum Steering Team.
>
>
>
> I would like to share key feedback in our community for prop-168, based on
> a meeting we organized on 22nd Jan to discuss these proposals. Please note
> that it is a summary of the discussions among the 11 Japanese community
> members who attended the meeting.
>
>
>
> Many opposing opinions were expressed from the attendees about this
> proposal.
>
>
>
> (comment details)
> - The proposal states that expanding the maximum allocation size would
> allow organizations that need additional addresses to avoid transfers or
> leasing. However, addressing leasing-related issues by changing the
> allocation size does not appear to be an appropriate approach.
>
>
>
> - Several proposals to modify IPv4 allocation sizes have been submitted in
> the past,
> and there is a sense of fatigue regarding repeated discussions of this
> topic. Greater effort should be directed toward IPv6 deployment rather
> than continued debate over IPv4.
>
>
>
> - From a policy perspective, it is undesirable for allocation sizes to
> vary depending on
> the time period. This proposal may simply accelerate IPv4 exhaustion by a
> few years.
>
>
>
> - According to APNIC’s transfer request list, only around 10% of
> organizations request
> address blocks of /23 or smaller. Therefore, it is unlikely that this
> proposal would often
> lead to additional allocations for organizations whose historical maximum
> allocation was /23.
>
>
>
> - Expanding the allocation size while reserving a new /16 pool for
> transfers appears
> inconsistent with the stated objective of distributing addresses more
> broadly.
>
>
>
> - If expanding the allocation size demonstrably reduces reliance on
> leasing, then support
> for the proposal would be warranted.
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
>
>
> Satoru Tsurumaki
> JPOPF Steering Team
>
>
>
> 2025年12月18日(木) 10:12 顧靜恆 < chku@ twnic. tw ( [email protected] ) >:
>
>
>>
>>
>> Dear SIG members,
>>
>>
>>
>> A new proposal "prop-168-v001: Increase to maximum IPv4 delegations" has
>> been sent to the Policy SIG for review.
>>
>>
>>
>> It will be presented at the Open Policy Meeting (OPM) at APNIC 61 on
>> Wednesday , 11 February 2026.
>>
>>
>>
>> https:/ / 2026. apricot. net/ programme/ programme#/ day/ 8/ (
>> https://2026.apricot.net/programme/programme#/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:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> https:/ / www. apnic. net/ community/ policy/ proposals/ prop-168 (
>> https://www.apnic.net/community/policy/proposals/prop-168 )
>>
>>
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>>
>>
>> Bikram, Shaila, and Ching-Heng
>>
>>
>>
>> APNIC Policy SIG Chairs
>>
>>
>>
>> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> prop-168-v001: Increase to maximum IPv4 delegations
>>
>>
>>
>> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Proposers:
>>
>>
>>
>> Christopher Hawker ( chris@ thesysadmin. au ( [email protected] ) )
>>
>>
>>
>> 1. Problem statement
>>
>>
>>
>> -------------------------
>>
>>
>>
>> As of 09 December 2025 , there were 3,142,656 IPv4 addresses (12,276 x /24)
>> in the available pool [1].
>>
>>
>>
>> Since prop-127 was implemented back on 04 April 2019 there were 549 new
>> members in 2025 (as of 03/12/2025), 667 new members in 2024 [2],
>>
>>
>>
>> 904 in 2023 [3], 824 in 2022 [4], 783 in 2021 [5], 827 in 2020 [6] and 841
>> in 2019 [7] (noting that this also includes Q1 2024 which was prior to
>> implementation of prop-127).
>>
>>
>>
>> At the current average of 727 new member accounts per year, and if each
>> member was to apply for the maximum delegation of /23,
>>
>>
>>
>> the delegation rate would be approximately 1454 x /24 per year, meaning
>> the pool will be exhausted in 2035.
>>
>>
>>
>> This means that resources will sit idle in the available pool for an
>> extended period (up to 9 years), while current members are required to
>> acquire
>>
>>
>>
>> additional space through market transfers or lease address space to meet
>> operational requirements.
>>
>>
>>
>> 2. Objective of policy change
>>
>>
>>
>> ----------------------------------
>>
>>
>>
>> Current address policy only allows for the maximum delegation of up to and
>> including a /23 to new and existing members.
>>
>>
>>
>> This policy change will allow organisations who became members since the
>> implementation of prop-127 and with less than an aggregated /22 to receive
>> an additional
>>
>>
>>
>> delegation of up to a maximum of a /22 IPv4 delegation.
>>
>>
>>
>> 3. Situation in other regions
>>
>>
>>
>> --------------------------------
>>
>>
>>
>> - The maximum size aggregate a member in the ARIN region may qualify for
>> at any one time a maximum is a /22 [8].
>>
>>
>>
>> - "The sum of all allocations made to a single LIR by the RIPE NCC is
>> limited to a maximum of 256 IPv4 addresses (a single /24)." [9]
>>
>>
>>
>> - Exhaustion Phase 2 (section 5.4.3.2) in AFRINIC's Consolidated Policy
>> Manual states that the "maximum will be /22 per allocation/assignment"
>> [10].
>>
>>
>>
>> - LACNIC's Policy Manual lists under section 11.1.4 "Policies Relating to
>> the Exhaustion of IPv4 Address Space" that the maximum size a new member
>> may
>>
>>
>>
>> receive is a /22, while under 11.1.2 it states that existing members are
>> ineligible for additional space under this policy [11].
>>
>>
>>
>> 4. Proposed policy solution
>>
>>
>>
>> --------------------------------
>>
>>
>>
>> Update "APNIC-127 APNIC Internet Number Resource Policies" with the below:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> - Delete paragraphs 2 and 3 from section 6.1 "Minimum and maximum IPv4
>> delegations", and replace with the following:
>>
>>
>>
>> Members who hold less than a / 22 may apply for additional space, to bring
>> their combined holdings up to and including a /22.
>>
>>
>>
>> Members who have transferred any IPv4 address space of any size out of
>> their member account are ineligible for further delegations from APNIC.
>>
>>
>>
>> - Delete paragraph 4 from section 11.0 "IPv4 Transfers", and replace with
>> the following:
>>
>>
>>
>> Addresses delegated from the available pool cannot be transferred for a
>> minimum of five years from the date of delegation.
>>
>>
>>
>> If a member received an initial delegation and applies for a subsequent
>> delegation, all delegations to the member cannot be transferred for a
>> minimum of 5 years
>>
>>
>>
>> from the date of the most recent delegation.
>>
>>
>>
>> - Update point 4 from paragraph 1 under section 11.1.1 "Conditions on the
>> space to be transferred" as below:
>>
>>
>>
>> Addresses delegated from the available pool cannot be transferred for a
>> minimum of five years from the date the original delegation was made.
>>
>>
>>
>> If the source entity received a delegation from APNIC within the last 5
>> years, any resources delegated from the available pool (including those
>> delegated over 5 years ago)
>>
>>
>>
>> cannot be transferred for a minimum of 5 years from the date the most
>> recent delegation was made.
>>
>>
>>
>> - Delete paragraph 3 from section 11.2.1 "Conditions on the space to be
>> transferred" and replace with the following:
>>
>>
>>
>> Some RIRs, including APNIC, have restrictions against the transfer of
>> certain address blocks.
>>
>>
>>
>> APNIC policy does not allow the transfer of address space delegated from
>> the available pool to be transferred for a minimum of five years from the
>> date of the most
>>
>>
>>
>> recent delegation to the member.
>>
>>
>>
>> - Delete paragraph 2 from section 14.0 "Mergers & Acquisitions" and
>> replace with the following:
>>
>>
>>
>> Addresses delegated from the available pool cannot be transferred for a
>> minimum of five years from the date of the most recent delegation from the
>> available pool.
>>
>>
>>
>> - Add new section 5.1.5 "Reservation for IPv4 to IPv6 Transitioning":
>>
>>
>>
>> APNIC will reserve a /16 from the available pool, for the purpose of
>> delegating to members in order to assist with IPv4 to IPv6 transitioning
>> once the available pool
>>
>>
>>
>> has been exhausted. Addresses delegated from this pool are ineligible for
>> transfers, and must be returned to APNIC when no longer required.
>>
>>
>>
>> If a member receives a delegation under this policy and is found to not be
>> using the address space for IPv4-to-IPv6 transitioning, APNIC may recover
>> the resources from the member.
>>
>>
>>
>> 5. Advantages / Disadvantages
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------
>>
>>
>>
>> Advantages:
>>
>>
>>
>> - This will help to make additional resources available to members who
>> need it, that would otherwise need to acquire space through market
>> transfers or lease address space.
>>
>>
>>
>> Disadvantages:
>>
>>
>>
>> - This policy will accelerate the exhaustion of IPv4 address space,
>> however, given the slow rate of new memberships
>>
>>
>>
>> the benefits of additional space becoming available to members outweigh
>> the disadvantages of accelerated exhaustion.
>>
>>
>>
>> - This may create a sudden rush of members in applications for additional
>> resources, leading to extended waiting times for the assessment of
>> applications.
>>
>>
>>
>> 6. Impact on resource holders
>>
>>
>>
>> -----------------------------------
>>
>>
>>
>> No known impacts to resource holders.
>>
>>
>>
>> 7. References
>>
>>
>>
>> ----------------
>>
>>
>>
>> [1] APNIC Delegation Statistics as of 09 December 2025 : https:/ / ftp.
>> apnic.
>> net/ stats/ apnic/ 2025/ delegated-apnic-extended-20251209. gz (
>> https://ftp.apnic.net/stats/apnic/2025/delegated-apnic-extended-20251209.gz
>> )
>>
>>
>>
>> [2] Page 22, APNIC 2024 Activity Report: https:/ / www. apnic. net/
>> wp-content/
>> uploads/ 2025/ 02/ APNIC-AR-2024. pdf (
>> https://www.apnic.net/wp-content/uploads/2025/02/APNIC-AR-2024.pdf )
>>
>>
>>
>> [3] Page 19, APNIC 2023 Activity Report: https:/ / www. apnic. net/
>> wp-content/
>> uploads/ 2024/ 02/ APNIC_AR_2023. pdf (
>> https://www.apnic.net/wp-content/uploads/2024/02/APNIC_AR_2023.pdf )
>>
>>
>>
>> [4] Page 17, APNIC 2022 Activity Report: https:/ / www. apnic. net/
>> wp-content/
>> uploads/ 2023/ 05/ APNIC_AR_2022_FINAL. pdf (
>> https://www.apnic.net/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/APNIC_AR_2022_FINAL.pdf )
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> [5] Page 17, APNIC 2021 Activity Report: https:/ / www. apnic. net/
>> wp-content/
>> uploads/ 2022/ 03/ APNIC_AR_2021. pdf (
>> https://www.apnic.net/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/APNIC_AR_2021.pdf )
>>
>>
>>
>> [6] Page 18, APNIC 2020 Activity Report: https:/ / www. apnic. net/
>> wp-content/
>> uploads/ 2021/ 03/ APNIC-2020-Annual-Report. pdf (
>> https://www.apnic.net/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/APNIC-2020-Annual-Report.pdf
>> )
>>
>>
>>
>> [7] Page 30, APNIC 2019 Activity Report: https:/ / www. apnic. net/
>> wp-content/
>> uploads/ 2020/ 02/ APNIC-AR-2019-FINAL. pdf (
>> https://www.apnic.net/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/APNIC-AR-2019-FINAL.pdf )
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> [8] ARIN Waitlist, Number Resource Policy Manual, ARIN: https:/ / www. arin.
>> net/ participate/ policy/ nrpm/ #4-1-8-arin-waitlist (
>> https://www.arin.net/participate/policy/nrpm/#4-1-8-arin-waitlist )
>>
>>
>>
>> [9] Allocations made by the RIPE NCC to LIRs, IPv4 Address Allocation and
>> Assignment Policies for the RIPE NCC Service Region, RIPE NCC: https:/ / www.
>> ripe. net/ publications/ docs/ ripe-826/
>> #51-allocations-made-by-the-ripe-ncc-to-lirs
>> (
>> https://www.ripe.net/publications/docs/ripe-826/#51-allocations-made-by-the-ripe-ncc-to-lirs
>> )
>>
>>
>>
>> [10] Soft Landing, Consolidated Policy Manual, AFRINIC: https:/ / afrinic.
>> net/ policy/ manual#Soft-Landing (
>> https://afrinic.net/policy/manual#Soft-Landing )
>>
>>
>>
>> [11] Policies relating to the Exhaustion of IPv4 Address Space, LACNIC
>> Policy Manual: https:/ / www. lacnic. net/ innovaportal/ file/ 680/ 1/
>> manual-politicas-en-2-21.
>> pdf (
>> https://www.lacnic.net/innovaportal/file/680/1/manual-politicas-en-2-21.pdf
>> )
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> SIG-policy - https:/ / mailman. apnic. net/ sig-policy@ lists. apnic. net/
>> ( https://mailman.apnic.net/[email protected]/ ) To unsubscribe
>> send an email to sig-policy-leave@ lists. apnic. net (
>> [email protected] )
>>
>>
>
>
>
> --
> --
> Satoru Tsurumaki
> BBIX, Inc
> _______________________________________________
> SIG-policy - https:/ / mailman. apnic. net/ sig-policy@ lists. apnic. net/
> ( https://mailman.apnic.net/[email protected]/ ) To unsubscribe
> send an email to sig-policy-leave@ lists. apnic. net (
> [email protected] )
>
>
>
_______________________________________________
SIG-policy - https://mailman.apnic.net/[email protected]/
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
