LACNIC · RIR ウォッチ
Temporary Transfers
提案ごとの記録はここから確認できます。何が変わり、なぜ重要だったのか、誰が何を主張し、立場がどう変化し、何が決定され、どの点で証拠がなお不足しているのかを追えます。
出典に基づく事実
- ポリシー ID
- LAC-2023-7
- RIR
- LACNIC
- 公式ステータス
- Withdrawn
- 提出日
- 2025/08/14
- 出典の最終更新
- 2026/11/15
実際に議論を方向づけたのは誰か?
ポリシーの変遷
Separate public logs for permanent and temporary transfers · Version 2 replaces the single transfer log with a permanent-transfer log and a separate equivalent temporary-transfer log containing start and end dates. Version 1 used one log with an empty end date for permanent transfers. Both retain public visibility of temporary transfers.
出典に基づく事実 −
In the case of permanent transfers, the end date of the transaction will be left blank. For temporary transfers, the specific end date of the transfer will be specified.出典に基づく事実 ↗
出典に基づく事実 +
LACNIC will maintain another publicly accessible log equivalent to the one described above for temporary transfers, where the start and end dates of the transfers will also be recorded.出典に基づく事実 ↗
Thirty-day extension request deadline removed · Version 2 removes the requirement to request an extension at least 30 days before the agreed end date. It retains formal endorsement by both parties and verification by LACNIC before updating that date. The revised clause sets no replacement minimum notice period.
出典に基づく事実 −
An extension of the term must be requested at least 30 days before the end date of the previously agreed-upon transaction.出典に基づく事実 ↗
出典に基づく事実 +
This date shall be updated in the event of an agreement to extend the initially agreed-upon term, a decision that must be formally endorsed by both parties and verified by LACNIC.出典に基づく事実 ↗
Recipient conditions and originator oversight made explicit · Version 2 expressly assigns the ASN, operational IPv6, RPKI, geolocation/IRR and MANRS conditions to the receiving entity, requires their guarantee in the parties’ agreement and makes the originating entity responsible for oversight. It also permits LACNIC to establish operational compliance practices. The technical conditions themselves largely remain from version 1.
出典に基づく事実 −
Temporary transfers must meet additional conditions. Failure to adhere to these conditions will serve as immediate grounds for the revocation of the transfer:出典に基づく事実 ↗
出典に基づく事実 +
The entity originating the transfer is responsible for overseeing that these conditions are met. LACNIC may establish operational practices to ensure compliance.出典に基づく事実 ↗
Warning before revocation for failed due diligence · Version 2 replaces the statement that failure of the additional conditions is immediate grounds to revoke the transfer with a due-diligence mechanism aimed at the originating entity. LACNIC may warn that entity, including for failures across different transfers or recipients; ignoring the warning may lead to immediate revocation of the resources involved.
出典に基づく事実 −
Failure to adhere to these conditions will serve as immediate grounds for the revocation of the transfer:出典に基づく事実 ↗
出典に基づく事実 +
If the originating entity fails to exercise due diligence, even with different temporary transfers or receiving entities, LACNIC may issue a warning. Ignoring such warning may result in the immediate revocation of the resources involved.出典に基づく事実 ↗
An IPv6 deployment plan becomes sufficient · Version 3 allows the recipient to have either operational IPv6 or an IPv6 deployment plan. Version 2 required operational IPv6 when announcing the transferred IPv4 resources. The change introduces a planning alternative and removes that explicit announcement-time operational prerequisite.
出典に基づく事実 −
The receiving entity must have operational IPv6 at the time of announcing the transferred IPv4 resources.出典に基づく事実 ↗
Recipients cannot originate onward transfers · Version 3 adds an express prohibition on the receiving entity being a source of subsequent transfers. Version 2 required restoration of the original registration at the end of a temporary transfer but did not include this explicit onward-transfer prohibition.
出典に基づく事実 −
In the case of temporary transfers, LACNIC shall restore this information to its original values (the values prior to the transfer) on the transaction’s end date.出典に基づく事実 ↗
Specific warning and revocation mechanism removed · Version 3 retains the originator’s responsibility for compliance oversight and LACNIC’s ability to establish operational practices, but removes the explicit warning followed by immediate resource revocation for ignored warnings. The omission changes the proposed enforcement text; it does not remove obligations under other applicable policies or agreements.
出典に基づく事実 −
If the originating entity fails to exercise due diligence, even with different temporary transfers or receiving entities, LACNIC may issue a warning. Ignoring such warning may result in the immediate revocation of the resources involved.出典に基づく事実 ↗
出典に基づく事実 +
The entity originating the transfer is responsible for overseeing that these conditions are met. LACNIC may establish operational practices to ensure compliance. The receiving entity is not a valid source for subsequent transfers.出典に基づく事実 ↗
Technical recipient requirements become recommendations · Version 4 recasts the ASN, IPv6 or deployment plan, RPKI, geolocation/IRR and MANRS conditions as advisable requirements rather than mandatory conditions guaranteed by the parties’ agreement. The separate bar on onward transfers remains. The revised list should therefore not be presented as five mandatory eligibility tests.
出典に基づく事実 −
Temporary transfers are subject to additional conditions that must be guaranteed by the agreement between both parties:出典に基づく事実 ↗
出典に基づく事実 +
It is advisable to establish requirements for the receiving entity, such as: • Having an ASN to announce the resources, • Having IPv6 or an IPv6 deployment plan, • Having RPKI for the resources, • Updating the geolocation and IRR information, and • Adhering to the best practices established by MANRS.出典に基づく事実 ↗
Revocation clauses broadened and originator oversight omitted · Version 4 requires revocation clauses for resource abuse or other policy violations and states that they protect the original holder from repercussions. Version 3 referred to misuse or abuse and separately assigned oversight to the originator. Version 4 omits that oversight sentence and LACNIC’s operational-practices sentence; its protective wording is a proposal claim, not proof of legal immunity.
出典に基づく事実 −
The entity originating the transfer is responsible for overseeing that these conditions are met. LACNIC may establish operational practices to ensure compliance.出典に基づく事実 ↗
出典に基づく事実 +
Temporary transfers must include revocation clauses to address the abuse of resources or other policy violations, protecting the original holder from any repercussions.出典に基づく事実 ↗
Sub-assignment treatment introduced in explanatory material · Version 4 adds operational guidance that temporary transfers may be treated as sub-assignments while remaining distinguishable from ordinary sub-assignments. This appears in additional information, while the proposed policy still uses the temporary-transfer framework. It does not yet expressly waive a connectivity requirement in the operative text.
出典に基づく事実 −
In the case of temporary transfers, LACNIC shall restore this information to its original values (the values prior to the transfer) on the transaction’s end date.出典に基づく事実 ↗
出典に基づく事実 +
From an operational point of view, temporary transfers may be treated as sub-assignments and therefore ‘enjoy’ all their inherent properties.出典に基づく事実 ↗
Standalone temporary-transfer section and connectivity exception · Version 5 replaces the proposed combined permanent-and-temporary transfer section with a separate section 2.3.2.19 for temporary transfers. It expressly treats these as sub-assignments without requiring connectivity on the same physical infrastructure, including an explicit end-user sub-assignment exception. The intra-LACNIC scope and /24 minimum remain.
出典に基づく事実 −
Both temporary and permanent IPv4 address transfers will be allowed between LIRs and/or end users (hereinafter “entities”), as provided for below.出典に基づく事実 ↗
出典に基づく事実 +
Temporary of IPv4 address transfers (operationally treated as sub-assignments and without requiring connectivity on the same physical infrastructure) will be permitted between LIRs and/or end users (explicitly allowing sub-assignments), hereinafter “entities”, exclusively within the LACNIC region (intra-RIR), under the following conditions.出典に基づく事実 ↗
Simplified recipient justification and no stated /20 ceiling · Version 5 replaces the ordinary initial/additional allocation justification and explicit aggregate /20 recipient ceiling with a simplified demonstration that the recipient lacks sufficient addresses for its needs. It gives examples and lets LACNIC specify a procedure if necessary. The new temporary-transfer section contains no replacement /20 cap.
出典に基づく事実 −
In the case of temporary transfers, a specific recipient may only receive (in total) a maximum of a /20.出典に基づく事実 ↗
出典に基づく事実 +
In order for an entity within the LACNIC region to qualify for receiving a transfer, it must first go through a simplified process of justifying its IPv4 resources before LACNIC. The purpose of this process is to demonstrate that the recipient lacks sufficient addresses to meet their needs (e.g., launching a new service or entity, supporting user and/or infrastructure growth, transitioning to IPv6, temporary needs, etc.).出典に基づく事実 ↗
Public-log details and extension procedure no longer prescribed · Version 5 retains a public temporary-transfer log for traceability but omits the detailed field list, explicit start/end-date requirements and extension procedure requiring both parties’ endorsement and LACNIC verification. These details are no longer prescribed by the new section; the general traceability obligation remains.
出典に基づく事実 −
The end date of a temporary transfer shall be updated if the parties agree to extend its initial duration, a decision that must be formally endorsed by both parties and verified by LACNIC.出典に基づく事実 ↗
出典に基づく事実 +
LACNIC shall maintain a publicly accessible log of temporary transfers to ensure that all events are traceable.出典に基づく事実 ↗
Automatic restoration of registration omitted · Version 5 omits the explicit instruction to restore pre-transfer registration values on the temporary transfer’s end date. It instead introduces operational treatment as a sub-assignment. The rationale still envisages return of the addresses, but that intention must not be reported as the same operative restoration instruction found in version 4.
出典に基づく事実 −
In the case of temporary transfers, LACNIC shall restore this information to its original values (the values prior to the transfer) on the transaction’s end date.出典に基づく事実 ↗
出典に基づく事実 +
Temporary of IPv4 address transfers (operationally treated as sub-assignments and without requiring connectivity on the same physical infrastructure) will be permitted between LIRs and/or end users (explicitly allowing sub-assignments), hereinafter “entities”, exclusively within the LACNIC region (intra-RIR), under the following conditions.出典に基づく事実 ↗
Both parties must have executed the service agreement · Version 5 expressly requires both transferring and receiving entities to have executed the service agreement. Version 4 stated that both were subject to the relevant RIR’s policies and membership terms but did not add this explicit execution requirement.
出典に基づく事実 −
Both the transferring and the receiving entities will be subject to the policies and membership terms and conditions of the corresponding RIR.出典に基づく事実 ↗
出典に基づく事実 +
Both the transferring and the receiving entities will be subject to the policies and membership terms and conditions of the corresponding RIR. Therefore, both must have executed the service agreement.出典に基づく事実 ↗
Mandatory abuse-revocation clauses removed · Version 5 removes the requirement for transfer agreements to contain revocation clauses for abuse or policy violations, along with the statement about protecting the original holder. It still requires a signed legal document supporting the transfer and retains the parties’ general policy and agreement obligations.
出典に基づく事実 −
Temporary transfers must include revocation clauses to address the abuse of resources or other policy violations, protecting the original holder from any repercussions.出典に基づく事実 ↗
出典に基づく事実 +
Both entities must submit to LACNIC a signed copy of the legal document supporting the transfer.出典に基づく事実 ↗
Recommended technical conditions omitted · Version 5 omits version 4’s advisory list covering ASN, IPv6 or deployment plan, RPKI, geolocation/IRR and MANRS. The prohibition on the temporary recipient making onward transfers remains as section 2.3.2.19.8. The omission removes these recommendations from this proposal; it does not cancel independent obligations elsewhere.
出典に基づく事実 −
It is advisable to establish requirements for the receiving entity, such as: • Having an ASN to announce the resources, • Having IPv6 or an IPv6 deployment plan, • Having RPKI for the resources, • Updating the geolocation and IRR information, and • Adhering to the best practices established by MANRS.出典に基づく事実 ↗
出典に基づく事実 +
The entity receiving a temporary transfer may not originate subsequent transfers.出典に基づく事実 ↗
議論のタイムライン
エンティティ
読み込み中
出典と収録範囲
公開討議のアーカイブ
収録範囲
最初の収録: 1999/10/21
最新の収録: 2026/11/15
