Re: [sig-policy] Address Transfer Policy Proposal
- To: Seiichi Kawamura <kawamucho at mesh dot ad dot jp>
- Subject: Re: [sig-policy] Address Transfer Policy Proposal
- From: Terry Manderson <terry at terrym dot net>
- Date: Thu, 16 Jul 2009 16:43:50 +1000
- Cc: Izumi Okutani <izumi at nic dot ad dot jp>, Policy SIG <sig-policy at apnic dot net>
- Delivered-to: sig-policy at mailman dot apnic dot net
- In-reply-to: <4A5EBC75.4040807 at mesh dot ad dot jp>
- List-archive: <http://mailman.apnic.net/mailing-lists/sig-policy>
- List-help: <mailto:email@example.com?subject=help>
- List-id: APNIC SIG on resource management policy <sig-policy.lists.apnic.net>
- List-post: <mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org>
- List-subscribe: <http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy>, <mailto:email@example.com?subject=subscribe>
- List-unsubscribe: <http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy>, <mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org?subject=unsubscribe>
- References: <F72ACDCB-D54B-434C-B133-95A94C44C6A9@apnic.net> <AA9D0B9A-A156-4DE8-BDD7-F31690B88175@apnic.net> <4A5EA683.email@example.com> <4A5EAF49.firstname.lastname@example.org> <4A5EB00C.email@example.com> <ED960528-E62C-4F98-A081-5D4E2DAEA7D6@terrym.net> <4A5EBC75.firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Sender: Terry Manderson <email@example.com>
Hi Seiichi, On 16/07/2009, at 3:36 PM, Seiichi Kawamura wrote:
Just to clarify,B: Any address that will be transfered must be held by the transferingparty for at least 12 months, regardless of how the address was obtained.APNIC's current policy reads,"Based on these factors, APNIC and NIRs will allocate enough address space to meet theLIR's estimated needs for a period up to one year" This is one of the reasons for the "12 months" in option B. In simple words, address blocks are allocated to meet one year's estimated need, so keep it for one year.
I see now how you reached that wording in the "B:" option.The nagging question I have is how you can possibly enforce a "must" and still try to avoid a a greyish-to-black marketplace? In real terms my guess is that it would be a case of delayed accounting. e.g I might acquire a large number of addresses and allocations by various means and on-sell/trade/transfer them almost immediately, and then tell APNIC or the NIR (should they adopt) about it in 12 months time. And If I actually go out of business before then? I wonder if those address blocks might be left in a very weird state. ie in use by the people I transferred to, but due to come back to APNIC.
There's one thing that I explained at the JP community meeting that wasn't posted to this list. If one decided to transfer in less than one year, APNIC(or an NIR) may record the transfer, and can also put limitations on the members in any way that the hostmaster feels right. This wasn't described in the text and I appologise for this.
While I think it is nice that you recognise the intelligence of the Hostmaster, I'm not really keen to see hostmasters apply "feels right" limitations to organisations outside a codified framework. The expectations of both the hostmasters and the organisations/members need to be declared well in advance of entering the process.