RE: [WG-BB] other issues

[Anne Lord <anne@apnic.net>]

Arano San,

some comments.

> 1) customer list
> 
> Some people strongly disagree with submission obligation.
> On the other hand, registries need more clear evidence
> to justify the number the applicant submits. 
> 
> My suggestion;
> APNIC/NIR may require applicants to submit a customer list
> or something equivalent to proof the number the applicant
> submits.

Agreed. In fact, current practice does not require this
and it is not asked for routinely.  Only if it seems other 
information is not sufficient. So "may" is good wording in my opinion. 

> 2) assignment justification
> 
> It is difficult to summarize this. Many people have
> pointed out there are more than one PC in one household
> these days, but this seems not give enough reasons
> to skip justification for /29 or something.
> 
> My suggestion: Let's keep the original proposal and
> make the guideline ASAP. In parallel, we should
> continue to discuss this issue.
  
Agreed. Note the original document did say to "create a guidelines 
document that would describe APNIC's request evaluations procedures
and best current practices that apply to addresing various network 
services".

The original proposal says: If more than one IP address is required
for static addressing then full technical justification will be 
required through the standard process.

I agree that this requires further work. 

> 3) registration criteria
> 
> Although a proposal to change /30 to /28 was raised
> at Taipei meeting, no more opinions seem to follow this.
> 
> One question I got is how to deal with multiple /32s.
> This can be seen as a typical situation in cable network.
> 
> My suggestion: /30 or 4 /32s should be the threshold.

The actual document said any prefix shorter than a /30 ie. /29 and
shorter. So registration is not required for /30 and longer.
 
Best wishes,

Anne
--


-
- This list (wg-bb) is handled by majordomo@lists.apnic.net