Re: [sig-policy] Timeline for implementing the transfer proposal
> Randy Bush said the following on 19/2/09 13:04:
>>> Izumi-san said:
>>> what I'd like to understand is whether prop-067 intends to have timeline
>>> independent from exhaustion of APNIC's address pool.
>> i do not believe the authors considered the question, or at least not
> As the other (asleep) author, I concur.
>> i am not sure i have a strong opinion. but i am not sure what
>> delay gains, trading is happening now, and i want the records to be kept
>> well (cf your desire for knowing the history of a block).
> Likewise I have no strong opinion on the time-line. Input gladly received.
It's already a few days until the session, but let me share what I've
heard from ISPs in Japan.
They actually feel that we don't have to wait until the IANA pool to run
out for the implementation of the policy.
In fact, it's preferable to have transfer policy implemented before it
happens so that we can adjust to the situation before people get too
desperate for space thus less confusion.
Here are some of the comments;
* Some people may be concerned about deploying two different mechanism
as the same time (allocations from APNIC and tranfers) but since the
whole idea behind it is different in the first place, it's okay to
deploy them in paralle. I consider transfer more like a gentlemen's
agreement that both parties agree about the use of specific space.
(which is why I don't think justification of needs are necessary)
* If we deploy it after APNIC/IANA pool runs out, it will accelerate
sales of address space at the last mininute and may lead to confusion
Better to be able to adjust and get used to the situation in advance
* There will be needs at quite early stage to transfer addresss space
between group companies
* It's okay to have the transfer address space before IANA/APNIC pool
runs out. I do wonder if there are needs to do the transfers while
you can obtain address space through APNIC