________________________________________________________________________

prop-067-v001: A simple transfer proposal
________________________________________________________________________


Authors:   Randy Bush
           randy@psg.com

           Philip Smith
           pfs@cisco.com

Version:   1

Date:      24 December 2008



1.  Introduction
----------------

This policy proposal seeks to permit APNIC to document transfers of IPv4
address space between organisations.


2.  Summary of current problem
------------------------------

There is already a small and growing activity of organisations holding
Internet resources transferring these resources between each other.

There is no record of these transfers held by APNIC, resulting in the
invalidity of registration information for those resources.


3.  Situation in other RIRs
---------------------------

RIPE NCC:

    The policy proposal 2007-08, "Enabling Methods for Reallocation of
    IPv4 Resources" was accepted in December 2008. See:

        http://www.ripe.net/ripe/policies/proposals/2007-08.html


ARIN:

   The proposal 2007-08, "Transfer Policy Clarifications" was
   implemented in August 2007:

        http://www.arin.net/policy/proposals/2007_8.html

    Proposal 2008-02, "IPv4 Transfer Policy Proposal" was abandoned:

        http://www.arin.net/policy/proposals/2008_2.html

    The proposal 2008-06, "Emergency Transfer Policy for IPv4 Addresses"
    is in last call until 21 January 2009:

        http://www.arin.net/policy/proposals/2008_6.html


LACNIC and AfriNIC have no similar policy.


4.  Details of the proposal
---------------------------
    
It is proposed that:

4.1 An organisation may transfer: 

    a. An intact allocated block
  
        - Allocated blocks smaller than the current minimum APNIC 
          allocation size may also be transferred as an intact block. 
          For example, a legacy /24.

     b. One or more subnets of an allocated block, provided no subnet is
        smaller than the current minimum APNIC allocation size.  
    
    
4.2 The recipient must be able to justify use of the transferred 
    resources according to current APNIC allocation and assignment 
    criteria.


4.3 Transfers between regions are permitted providing that:

    a. The organisation originating transfer of an address block must
       follow the policies of the originating RIR.

    b. The organisation receiving an address block must follow the 
       policies of the receiving RIR.


4.4 The originating address holder must be the holder of record, 
    whether a current member, historical, or otherwise.


4.5 If either the origin or recipient of the address block is in the
    APNIC region, they should be the holder of a current account in
    APNIC or the appropriate NIR.


4.6 If the originating address holder is in the APNIC region, they are
    prohibited from receiving more IPv4 address space, whether via
    transfer or directly from APNIC, for two years.


5.  Advantages and disadvantages of the proposal
------------------------------------------------

5.1 Advantages

    - The policy ensures the continued accuracy of APNIC's assignment
      and allocation database.
      
      Most service providers on the Internet today check the RIR
      assignment and allocation databases to determine who the
      legitimate holder of the Internet resources is prior to accepting
      those resources in routing announcements from their customers.
      This proposal ensures that they can carry on with this valuable
      validation technique during the run-out phase of IPv4 when
      transfers become more commonplace.      


    - The policy allows currently allocated yet unused IPv4 address
      space to be transferred to an entity that will be able to make use
      of it.


5.2 Disadvantages

    - None.


6.  Effect on APNIC Members
---------------------------

The proposal impacts all APNIC members in that it allows them to
originate or receive transfers of IPv4 address space directly to/from
another LIR.


7.  Effect on NIRs
------------------

The proposal has no direct impact on NIRs, but impacts members of NIRs
in the same way it impacts APNIC members.