April 2021 - address-policy-wg

WG chair rotation 2021
by Gert Doering 10 May '21

10 May '21

Dear AP WG, according to our WG Chair Selection process, one of the WG chairs has to step down every two years, and a new WG chair is selected by the WG. This time, it is my time to step down, and I will not(!) run again - I've been one of your chairmen for a long time, and I think it's time for a change. Do not despair :-) - as you are aware, we brought in two "trainee chairs" at the last meeting, Leo Vegoda and James Kennedy. Both have used the time to look "behind the curtains" and see what they will be getting themselves into, and last I heard, were willing to take the job. That said: it is your decision, as WG, not our decision as WG chair team. So other interested volunteers are free to make their interest known, and then the WG will decide. Please make your interest known to the remaining chair (Erik Bais) erik(a)bais.name and please include a short bio and your reason for applying. Erik will collect applications and publish them collectively on March 31st. Gert Doering -- creaky chair -- have you enabled IPv6 on something today...? SpaceNet AG Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard, Michael Emmer Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann D-80807 Muenchen HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen) Tel: +49 (0)89/32356-444 USt-IdNr.: DE813185279

10 12

Stockpiling IPv6 Update
by Marco Schmidt 28 Apr '21

28 Apr '21

Dear Address Policy Working Group, During the last Address Policy WG session in October 2020, we provided an update on the topic of stockpiling IPv6 allocations. For the upcoming RIPE 82 meeting, we want to share some additional information to support the community discussion. To summarise, the RIPE NCC observed a significant amount of members requesting several IPv6 allocations via multiple LIR accounts or the transfer policy. Based on the IPv6 policy, it is possible to request up to a /29 IPv6 allocation per LIR account, without any justification needed. Firstly, we want to stress again that this is not about any potential scarcity of IPv6. Rather we would like to ask the Working Group if the current development is within the intend of the IPv6 policy. Currently, we see around 100 members that have collected multiple IPv6 allocations with totaling amounts of /26 or more, with the maximum of 91 IPv6 allocations (totals /23+). To put this in perspective, in the last ten years, only 12 members could document the need for initial allocations of a /26 or more, with a decreasing trend in the last years while at the same time, more multiple smaller IPv6 allocations are being requested. We see a big discrepancy between organisations being able to justify larger IPv6 allocation based on actual network plans (despite eased policy requirements) and organisations that collect many /29 allocations without any real requirement of justification. We also noticed that some of the members rent out large blocks of their multiple allocations to other ISPs. While the IPv6 policy supports this approach, we would like to raise awareness that this creates a strong dependency of the ISP to their LIR, especially if large IPv6 networks are being deployed. In case the members decide to change their business model or terminate the membership, the sub-ordinated ISPs will be forced to renumber whole IPv6 networks or follow any requirement set by the LIR. We hope that this information will help the Working Group to review if the current development is in line with the intent of the IPv6 policy. Kind regards, Marco Schmidt Assistant Manager Registry Services and Policy Development RIPE NCC

1 0

Draft agenda AP-WG RIPE82 - virtual AP-WG
by Erik Bais 26 Apr '21

26 Apr '21

Dear working group, In the approaching time to the RIPE82 meeting there will be a couple things that are going to change. First as you may be aware, the AP-WG session is going to be on the TUESDAY instead of the Wednesday. This is due to the preference of people to not have WG sessions in parallel. So the AP-WG session is moved to the Tuesday May 18th 10:30 am Amsterdam time (CEST - UTC+2) Second this is going to be last WG session with our faithful Gert as co-Chair of the WG, as he is going to step down. And because he started RIPE 44 in Amsterdam, 2003 as chair for the LIR-WG (now AP-WG), he is probably one of the longest serving Chairs in our community. So, on the agenda, we have the following planned. We will be publishing a couple presentations in pre-recording, so that we can have more time for discussions. The publication of those pre-recordings is planned for the weekend before the WG session. The session is in the meeting schedule for 90 minutes .. but we plan to do a short break in approx. the middle.. to allow for some fresh coffee / short toilet break. So we have a pretty full agenda .. and we expect the session to allow for more time for discussion on various topics with this format, along with the information of the NCC about various topics. --- Draft agenda AP-WG session - RIPE82 A. Administrative Matters - Gert Döring Welcome, thanking the scribe, approving the minutes, etc. B. WG Chair selection / appointment - Erik Bais C. Current Policy Topics (Q&A based on pre-published slides/recording) Angela Dall'Ara, PDO, RIPE NCC - Global policy overview "What's going on?" - Common policy topics in all regions (end of IPv4, transfers, ...) - Brief overview of new proposals (if any) D. Feedback from the RIPE NCC Registry Services (Q&A based on pre-published slides/recording) Marco Schmidt, Registration Services [5 minutes break to top-up the hot drink of your choice] E. Introduction of candidates for the NRO NC Ulka Athale F. (Tentative) Agenda item arising from the DBTF James Kennedy or another DBTF member G. What colour is my IP(v4) space? PI addresses and LIRs Remco van Mook h. Systematic Review of RIPE Address Policy (Discussion) - Proposal to review whether environmental changes since a policy were agreed should be addressed with a policy update Z. AOB Hope to see you all on RIPE82. Regards, Gert Döring & Erik Bais, AP-WG chairs

2 1

RIPE DBTF Feedback
by Bijal Sanghani 14 Apr '21

14 Apr '21

Dear colleagues, I am writing to inform you that the RIPE Database Requirements Task Force (DBTF), is soliciting feedback on our recommendations for; Person Objects Historical Data Legal Address If you are interested or have any feedback on these topics, then please join the conversation on the RIPE Database WG mailing list so that we can keep all feedback and discussions in one place. Kind regards, Bijal on behalf of the DBTF

1 0

Request about homologation of policy documents
by Kurt Kayser 13 Apr '21

13 Apr '21

Dear RIPE friends, I have scanned the current address policy documents and I have some questions about homologation between a couple of topics. There are 2 main areas of concern, which I would like to discuss: 1. Validity of RIPE-451 - (IPv6 address space policy for IXPs.) aged well since 2009. Option 1: drop this document entirely - the pointer for the document "Obtaining the address space" (RIPE-575) is anyway outdated/obsoleted. Option 2: Integrate a relevant paragraph in the RIPE-738 (IPv6 address allocation and assignment policy) successor document? For comparison: RIPE-733 (IPv4 address ---) this area is mentioned in Section 6.1 - mainly due to minimal resources left to use. 2. Comparing Sections 6.x from RIPE-733 (IPv4 adresses allocation and assignment policy) with RIPE-738 (IPv6 address allocation and assignment policy) There are very nice paragraphs in Section 6.2 (network infrastructure) and 6.3 (validity of an assignment) which I miss as counterpart in RIPE-738. One would assume that there should somewhat similar approaches on how to assign and document used address space. There are also other areas that could be cleaned up (such as transfers - completely moved out of these documents or extended?) Suggestion: why not keep the same section numbering for identical topics? Best regards, Kurt Kayser

2 1

RIPE Database requirements progress
by ripedenis＠yahoo.co.uk 08 Apr '21

08 Apr '21

Colleagues For the benefit of those who don't often check the mail archives of the RIPE Database Task Force there have been 4 meetings in February and March and the TF has just published the minutes of their most recent meeting on their mail archive which can be found here:https://www.ripe.net/ripe/mail/archives/ripe-db-requirements-tf/ Their latest draft requirements document can be found here:https://www.ripe.net/participate/ripe/tf/rdb-requirements-tf/the-ripe-… There are quite a number of recommendations made regarding registration of address space in the RIPE Database. In their latest meeting minutes they also mention creation of assignment objects in the database (but this is not yet in their draft document). It would be helpful if more people would read this document (and meeting minutes) and comment or discuss publicly on this WG mailing list any issues regarding the TF draft document before they publish their final version of the requirements. They also plan to hold a BOF sometime in May where you can make comments. cheersdenis co-chair DB-WG

1 0