<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?><!DOCTYPE article  PUBLIC '-//OASIS//DTD DocBook XML V4.4//EN'  'http://www.docbook.org/xml/4.4/docbookx.dtd'><article><articleinfo><title>JPOPM29discussion1</title><revhistory><revision><revnumber>2</revnumber><date>2015-10-29 03:26:15</date><authorinitials>proxy4.nic.ad.jp</authorinitials></revision><revision><revnumber>1</revnumber><date>2015-10-29 02:37:37</date><authorinitials>proxy4.nic.ad.jp</authorinitials></revision></revhistory></articleinfo><section><title>[意見交換1] /22*2=/21の割り振りについて(仮) 概要</title><para>APNIC 40 Policy-Sigにて、Chairの山西氏より、次回Policy-Sigで新しい提案が予定されている旨、言及があった(*)。</para><para>内容は、現在受けることのできるIPv4アドレスの割り振りは、 </para><itemizedlist><listitem><para>最後の/8ポリシーに基づいた分配として、1事業者につき/22まで(103/8から)</para></listitem><listitem><para>返却済みIPアドレスからの分配として、1事業者につき/22まで</para></listitem></itemizedlist><para>となっているが、まとめて/21の割り振りを受けることができるように変更する、というものである。</para><para>提案自体はまだ出ていないため詳細は不明であるが、本件について、参加者との意見交換を行いたい。</para><para>(*)<ulink url="https://conference.apnic.net/data/40/10-Sept-Policy-SIG3.txt"/> より抜粋 </para><screen><![CDATA[Masato Yamanishi:  Since we have some time, let me explain
    about our pretty newest proposal.  Actually, it has not
    yet been accepted, but last week we received new -- how
    can I say? -- new draft proposal, but it was after the
    deadline and also it was not yet so mature.  So
    I decided not to present it in here, but basically it is
    related with Geoff's presentation this morning, because
    right now we have two different address pools, one is
    last /8 and another one is IANA returned pool.
]]><![CDATA[
    Basically, if applicants show enough need, they will
    receive /22 from last /8 pool and also another /22 from
    IANA returned pool.  That is the current operation.
]]><![CDATA[
        This new proposal asks the request to combine these
    two pools, so actually it means applicants can receive
    a single /21 instead of two /22s.
]]><![CDATA[
        I said to the author that since these two pools have
    different policies and have different supply and have --
    these two pools have different history, so please
    consider these points and update his proposal.
]]><![CDATA[
        He is now improving his proposal.  So it may be
    presented at the next meeting.  But I just want to let
    you know that we have another new one right now.  But it
    was received after the deadline, so it was not discussed
    in this meeting.
]]><![CDATA[
        That's the situation.
        If there is nothing, I would like to close this
    meeting.  Thank you very much for each presenter and
    also each author of the proposals, and thank you very
    much to everybody.]]></screen></section></article>