Re: [sig-policy] Address Transfer Policy Proposal
Hi Geoff,
On 16/07/2009, at 8:27 PM, Geoff Huston wrote:
C ver 1.1 ;)
"When a member disposes of address space using this transfer policy
the member should not be entitled to any further IPv4 allocations
or assigments from APNIC for a period of 12 months or until the
"final / 8" assignment measures are implemented. In exceptional
circumstances a member can submit a comprehensive plan justifying
an allocation and a notice of application will be posted for at least
7 days on the APNIC website."
"a notice of application will be posted for at least 7 days on the
APNIC website"
My, possibly incorrect, interpretation of this condition is that this
appears to be a significant departure from current practices where
applications and the details of applications are treated in strict
confidence by APNIC staff.
Section 3.1 para g of the APNIC membership agreement commits APNIC to:
"not disclose to any person (except to the General Secretariat,
Internet Administration Authorities, staff and contractors performing
necessary work for APNIC who sign a non-disclosure agreement, or as
legally required to do so) any confidential information which the
Member provides to the Company"
Does this include the act of retuning for address space within the
constructs of this policy proposal?
It would appear to me that this requirement to publish the application
ahh.. I see how you got there... The wording is "notice of
application", so I certainly don't expect APNIC or APNIC staff to
breech the confidentiality clauses housed in the membership agreement.
My intention was not for APNIC to post the application publicly.
An example notice of application can be as simple as:
"On DD/MM/YYYY The member with the unique anonymous ID of A91A7381
(from APNIC delegated stats files) has applied for additional
resources with consideration in regard to this policy (prop ###)."
Does this breech the membership confidentiality clause?
Those who are interested can then do legwork to observe the past
records of the ID A91A7381.. heck APNIC might even be kind enough to
href A91A7381 to `grep A91A7381 delegated-apnic-extended-latest` ;)
(note: I picked A91A7381 at random)
suggest that it would require a new membership agreement, on the
assumption that applications are treated as confidential information
under the terms of the current membership agreement.
So is this publication of an application really what was intended
here?
No that isn't what was intended.
And are folk comfortable with this?
.. Your interpretation, I should hope not! ;-P
Or am I missing something
here and is something different than disclosure of an application is
intended in the above text?
yes.
I am also unsure what is intended by such a publication of an
application. Is the secretariat supposed to take note of any comment
received from posting such a notice? Or not? Or... ? I suppose I am
I personally am not looking for a "email the secretariat to object"
link. I would trust that the secretariat has done due process and this
really is just a notification for the benefit of the community..
trying to understand what purpose is to be served by such a notice of
publication - some clarification here would be appreciated.
The notice of application is to add a level of transparency to a
potentially murky state. While I don't ever expect APNIC to decline a
request from a member in such a situation. I think it serves the
community better to have some level of visibility that some
organisations are indeed coming back after disposal. The knowledge of
those events (through an RSS feed) will allow us to ask questions..
"did we get this policy right?", "Is there a corner case here that we,
as a community missed?", "should the policy be amended?".. and many
other questions that come with such post implementation knowledge. I
personally don't need to know which organisations are applying, nor
the specifics of their application. Given that APNIC already publish
unique IDs liked to resources in the stats files, I don't see my
suggestion as a breech, or onerous on the secretariat. I am
interested, however, in the frequency and timing instances where
organisations do trigger this action.
Terry
