Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!


New on LowEndTalk? Please Register and read our Community Rules.

All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.

Prohibit to transfer 103/8 IPv4 reached agreement at APNIC.

indiavpsindiavps Member
edited September 2017 in General

Moratorium on 103/8 transfers effective from 14 September 2017.
https://www.apnic.net/community/policy/proposals/prop-116/ (Version 006)

Well, I guess it's a good thing.

Thanked by 1Aidan

Comments

  • raindog308raindog308 Administrator, Veteran

    "This proposal helps to ensure the distribution of the ‘Final /8’ (103/8) block is consistent with its original purpose, for distribution for new entrants to the industry."

    indiavps said: Well, I guess it's a good thing.

    Isn't it the purpose of a market to allocate scarce resources, rather than a corrupt bureaucracy?

  • 103/3 means 103 X /8 ? or 103.0.0.0/8?

  • RhysRhys Member, Host Rep

    @WHT said:
    103/3 means 103 X /8 ? or 103.0.0.0/8?

    the latter.

    Thanked by 1WHT
  • raindog308raindog308 Administrator, Veteran

    WHT said: 103/3 means 103 X /8 ? or 103.0.0.0/8?

    That sound you heard was ColoCrossing management momentarily erupting in joy.

    "103 new /8s? WOO HOO! No need for ipv6 now..."

  • @raindog308 said:
    "This proposal helps to ensure the distribution of the ‘Final /8’ (103/8) block is consistent with its original purpose, for distribution for new entrants to the industry."

    Isn't it the purpose of a market to allocate scarce resources, rather than a corrupt bureaucracy?

    A market sometimes needs some "guidance" to not devolve into a monopoly.

  • On another note: this thing went through six revisions and no-one bothered to spellcheck it?!

  • raindog308raindog308 Administrator, Veteran

    ucxo said: A market sometimes needs some "guidance" to not devolve into a monopoly.

    Too late- we already have the RIRs :-)

  • FranciscoFrancisco Top Host, Host Rep, Veteran

    "Did not reach consensus at APNIC 43 and was returned to the author and the mailing list for further discussion."

    Francisco

  • raindog308 said: "103 new /8s? WOO HOO! No need for ipv6 now..."

    almost...soon™

  • @Francisco said:
    "Did not reach consensus at APNIC 43 and was returned to the author and the mailing list for further discussion."

    Francisco

    "14 September 2017 Version 6 of the proposal reached consensus at the APNIC 44 AMM."

  • Say what you will- they're still more decisive, and less expensive than the UN.

  • pbgbenpbgben Member, Host Rep

    Sooo, as a new "provider" we can get a slice™ of that?

Sign In or Register to comment.