| CARVIEW |
Select Language
HTTP/2 200
date: Mon, 14 Jul 2025 13:19:15 GMT
content-type: text/html; charset=utf-8
cf-ray: 95f14f85b9bec188-BLR
cf-cache-status: DYNAMIC
last-modified: Tue, 30 Jul 2024 05:33:29 GMT
vary: Accept-Encoding
x-content-type-options: nosniff
strict-transport-security: max-age=15552000; preload
server: cloudflare
content-encoding: gzip
[sig-policy] Report on prop-056: IPv4 soft landing
[sig-policy] Report on prop-056: IPv4 soft landing
- To: sig-policy at apnic dot net
- Subject: [sig-policy] Report on prop-056: IPv4 soft landing
- From: Toshiyuki Hosaka <hosaka at nic dot ad dot jp>
- Date: Fri, 22 Feb 2008 12:06:04 +0900
- Delivered-to: sig-policy at mailman dot apnic dot net
- List-archive: <https://mailman.apnic.net/mailing-lists/sig-policy>
- List-help: <mailto:sig-policy-request@lists.apnic.net?subject=help>
- List-id: APNIC SIG on resource management policy <sig-policy.lists.apnic.net>
- List-post: <mailto:sig-policy@lists.apnic.net>
- List-subscribe: <https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy>, <mailto:sig-policy-request@lists.apnic.net?subject=subscribe>
- List-unsubscribe: <https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy>, <mailto:sig-policy-request@lists.apnic.net?subject=unsubscribe>
- Organization: Japan Network Information Center (JPNIC)
- User-agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.9 (Windows/20071031)
prop-056: IPv4 soft landing
________________________________________________________________________
Dear SIG members
Below is a summary of discussion on the proposal since the last
summary was posted on 5 February 2008. We encourage you to continue
discussion on the mailing list before it is presented at the Policy
SIG session at APNIC 25 on Thursday 28 February 2008.
We particularly encourage those of you who have previously not taken
part in the discussion to express your views:
- Do you support or oppose this proposal?
- Does this proposal solve a problem you are experiencing? If so,
tell the community about your situation.
- Do you see any disadvantages in this proposal?
- Is there anything in the proposal that is not clear?
- What changes could be made to this proposal to make it more
effective?
Discussion statistics
---------------------
Number of posts
- Since last summary: 3
- Since proposal posted (24 January 2008): 5
People participating in discussions
- Since last summary: 3
- Since proposal posted (24 January 2008): 4
Economy of origin of participants: 1 from Australia
1 from Japan
2 from outside AP
Summary of discussion since last summary
----------------------------------------
- In the light of Geoff Huston's projected figures on the impact
of tightening the utilisation criteria, should this proposal
be withdrawn?
- Saving addresses is not the sole aim of this proposal
- The proposal sends a clear message to the community about
the need to make the transition to IPv6
- The projected figures may not be reflected in reality
Full details of the proposal, including a link to the previous
discussion summary posted to this list, can be found at:
https://www.apnic.net/policy/proposals/prop-056-v001.html
- Prev by Date: [sig-policy] Report on prop-053: Changing minimum IPv4 allocation size to /22
- Next by Date: [sig-policy] summary: prop-058: Proposal to create IPv4 shared use address space among LIRs
- Previous by thread: [sig-policy] report on prop-056: IPv4 soft landing
- Next by thread: Re: [sig-policy] Report on prop-056: IPv4 soft landing
- Index(es):