March 2007 - address-policy-wg

ICANN board member selection - request for community input
by Hans Petter Holen 31 Mar '07

31 Mar '07

Please have a look at http://www.aso.icann.org/ and the candidates for the ICANN As you know you have elected 3 members from the ripe retion to be on the Address Council. One of our duties are to select an ICANN board member for 3 years. In order to select the best candidate for the job we also need community input. Please send us your input as indicated on the above web-page. All supporting statements will be made public on the web page. Best regards, Hans Petter Holen (one of) RIPE Region Address Council members

1 0

New IPv4 blocks allocated to RIPE NCC
by Alex Le Heux 28 Mar '07

28 Mar '07

[Apologies for duplicate mails] Dear Colleagues, The RIPE NCC received the IPv4 address ranges 92/8 and 93/8 from the IANA in March 2007. We will begin allocating from these ranges in the near future. The minimum allocation size for these two /8s has been set at /21. You may wish to adjust any filters you have in place accordingly. More information on the IP space administered by the RIPE NCC can be found on our web site at: <https://www.ripe.net/ripe/docs/ripe-ncc-managed-address-space.html> Additionally, please note that two "pilot" prefixes will be announced from each /8. The prefixes are: 92.192.0.0/16 93.192.0.0/16 92.255.248.0/21 93.255.248.0/21 They all originate in AS12654. More information on this "pilot" activity is available in the draft document "De-Bogonising New Address Blocks" which can be found at: <http://www.ripe.net/ripe/draft-documents/deboganising-draft.html> Best regards, Alex Le Heux RIPE NCC IP Resource Analyst

1 0

2006-06 implementation: IPv4 Maximum Allocation Period
by Alex le Heux 21 Mar '07

21 Mar '07

[Apologies for duplicate e-mails.] Dear Colleagues, We are pleased to announce that the policy proposed in proposal 2006-06: 'IPv4 Maximum Allocation Period' will come into effect on 18 April, 2007. This proposal can be found at: http://www.ripe.net/ripe/policies/proposals/2006-06.html We will also publish the new 'IPv4 Address Allocation and Assignment Policies for the RIPE NCC Service Region' document on this day. This document will be available at: http://www.ripe.net/ripe/docs/ipv4-policies.html Best regards, Alex Le Heux RIPE NCC IP Resource Analyst

1 0

suggesting medium/big customers to become lirs is a good or a bad idea?
by Tiberiu Ungureanu 21 Mar '07

21 Mar '07

hello in the past week, at the ISP i work for i received 2 requests for /22 each from customers that provide broadband services to end-users. i personally feel like this type of customers that have needs for such big chunks of ip space should be encouraged to become lirs, because * knowing their type of business it is very likely that they will request at least another /22 in about 1 year (or even less). * it is likely that they would want to be multihomed in the future, and it will be painful for them to renumber (well, if they do their homework will not be so painful, but it's a job they can avoid doing). anyway, at that point in time it is likely they will NEED to become lirs. * lirs pay money to ripe. the more payers, the more likely that the anual fees will be lower for everyone, or if they stay the same the more money RIPE-NCC will have to fund projects that will make our life easier. anyone else feels the same? should i go ahead and try to talk my management into talking them into becoming lirs? or do i just need a cup of coffee and/or more sleep? /t

4 4

2006-06 Proposal Accepted (IPv4 Maximum Allocation Period)
by Filiz Yilmaz 20 Mar '07

20 Mar '07

PDP Number: 2006-06 IPv4 Maximum Allocation Period Dear Colleagues, Consensus has been reached, and the proposal described in 2006-06 has been accepted by the RIPE community. This proposal is to have the RIPE NCC allocate address space to Local Internet Registries (LIRs) based on their one-year needs. In other words, it suggests setting a maximum allocation period of 12 months. You can find the full proposal at: http://ripe.net/ripe/policies/proposals/2006-06.html Thank you for your input. Regards Filiz Yilmaz RIPE NCC Policy Development Officer

1 0

Policy Proposal 2006-02
by JORDI PALET MARTINEZ 19 Mar '07

19 Mar '07

Hi all, I just wanted to remind that this policy is in discussion phase until 19th. The policy proposal was updated from a previous version on January 17th, so even if you had said anything regarding this proposal on the previous version, you need to state it again on the current version, so the chairs can sense about it. So, insisting a bit, if you haven't provided yet your view either in favor or against *this version* of the proposal, better do so now. And many thanks in advance for doing so ! Regards, Jordi ********************************************** The IPv6 Portal: http://www.ipv6tf.org Bye 6Bone. Hi, IPv6 ! http://www.ipv6day.org This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or confidential. The information is intended to be for the use of the individual(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, including attached files, is prohibited.

3 9

Comments on proposed IPv6 Initial Allocation criteria
by Jerzy Pawlus 06 Mar '07

06 Mar '07

Hi, The move towards removal of 200 assignments is a good one. However there is one thing which bothers me. If I read the 5.1.1. correctly the LIR must advertise the allocated block as a single prefix. So any LIR, unless it is a big one, will be limited to only one routing policy. But there are LIRs which hold more than one AS number and they will be left with nothing to advertise under the second and subsequent AS numbers. So I would propose either to remove this limitation or allow more than one /32 allocation per LIR with more than one AS number. Regards, Jurek

2 2