________________________________________________________________________

prop-071: Justifying receiving IPv4 address space
________________________________________________________________________


Author:    Philip Smith
           pfs@cisco.com

Version:   1

Date:      10 March 2009

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

This policy proposal seeks to supplement prop-050, "IPv4 address
transfers", by requiring recipients of transferred IPv4 address space to
justify its use.


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

Prop-050, "IPv4 address transfers", as it stands at time of writing,
places no requirement on the recipient of transferred IPv4 address space
to justify their need for the additional address space before APNIC
registers the transfer.

This can allow any organisation the opportunity to stockpile IPv4
address space, to the detriment of the entire industry during the IPv4
runout period.


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

RIPE NCC

  The transfer policy adopted by RIPE only permits transfers to take
  place if the recipient can justify the need for address space to the
  RIPE NCC. Recipients of transfers cannot transfer any portion of that
  address space to another organisation within 24 months. See:

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


ARIN

  The transfer policy specifically states the justification conditions
  under which transfers are permitted in the ARIN region - see section
  8.2 at:

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


LACNIC 

  LACNIC is currently discussing a transfer proposal:

    LAC-2009-04 Transfer of IPv4 Blocks within the LACNIC Region
    http://www.lacnic.net/documentos/politicas/LAC-2009-04-propuesta-en.pdf


AfriNIC has no transfer policy.


4.  Details of the proposal
---------------------------

It is proposed that:

  4.1 Until such a time when the prevailing APNIC IPv4 allocation
      practice uses the "final /8" policy [1], the recipient of a
      transfer is to justify use of transferred space using the
      allocation and assignment policies in force at the time of the
      transfer.

  4.2 After that time, no justification is needed. 

  4.3 Recipients of transferred address space are not permitted to
      transfer any portion of this address space to another
      organisation for at least 24 months.


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

5.1 Advantages

    - Recipients of IPv4 address transfers will have to fully
      justify receiving the address space, just as they do for any
      current direct allocations or assignments from the APNIC pool.

5.2 Disadvantages

    - None.


6.  Effect on APNIC members
---------------------------

The proposal impacts all APNIC members in that they now will have to
fully justify transfers they receive under proposal-050.


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.


8.  References
--------------

[1] See section 9.10, "Policies for IPv4 address space
    management in the Asia Pacific region"
    http://www.apnic.net/policy/add-manage-policy.html#9.10