- address-policy-wg - mailman.ripe.net

Cosmetic Surgery Project: Review Period on Version 2 of Draft Document, for Reverse Address Delegation of IPv4 and IPv6 Address Space
by Emilio Madaio 06 Sep '12

06 Sep '12

Dear colleagues, As part of the Cosmetic Surgery Project, the RIPE NCC is moving forward with a review of the policy document ripe-302, "Policy for Reverse Address Delegation of IPv4 and IPv6 address space in the RIPE NCC Service Region". After the feedback in the previous review phase, a new draft (2.0) of the policy document is online and ready for community review at: https://www.ripe.net/ripe/readability/improving-the-readability-of-ripe-doc… The highlights of the changes from the previous version include: -the removal of all unnecessary references to "reverse resolution" -the rewording and simplification of section 4.0 In response to the community's request: -section 3.0 focuses on who is able to ask for the delegation -the reference to the obsolete RFC 2874 has been replaced with the relevant active RFCs The Address Policy Working Group Co-Chairs decided to extend the review period until 3 October 2012 to allow the community more time to give their feedback. Please send your feedback on this draft document to the Address Policy Working Group at: <address-policy-wg at ripe.net>. Kind regards, Emilio Madaio Policy Development Officer RIPE NCC

3 2

Status request : 2012-04 - PI Assignments from the last /8
by Erik Bais 05 Sep '12

05 Sep '12

Hi, Could someone provide insight in the policy 2012-04? With the final /8 within grasp, I would like to have it clear where we stand. Current Phase Ends: 19 July 2012 Current Phase: Discussion Phase: Awaiting Decision from Proposer Awaiting Documentation Regards, Erik Bais

3 2

Re: [address-policy-wg] 2012-06 New Policy Proposal (Revert "Run Out Fairly" after IPv4 depletion)
by Jan Zorz ＠ go6.si 04 Sep '12

04 Sep '12

On 9/3/12 3:50 PM, Emilio Madaio wrote: > Dear Colleagues > > A proposed change to RIPE Document ripe-553, "IPv4 Address Allocation > and Assignment Policy for the RIPE NCC Service Region", is now > available for discussion. > > > You can find the full proposal at: > > https://www.ripe.net/ripe/policies/proposals/2012-06 I see the noble goal of this proposal - but why bother? Do we have even enough time for this proposal to become valid policy change according to all valid rules of PDP? http://www.ripe.net/internet-coordination/ipv4-exhaustion/ipv4-available-po… According to this graph we have one month to go. Cheers, Jan Zorz

5 6

Re: [address-policy-wg] 2012-06 New Policy Proposal (Revert "Run Out Fairly" after IPv4 depletion)
by Nick Hilliard 03 Sep '12

03 Sep '12

On 03/09/2012 14:50, Emilio Madaio wrote: > We encourage you to review this proposal and send your comments to > <address-policy-wg(a)ripe.net> before 1 October 2012. This policy is sensible. Nick

2 1

2012-06 New Policy Proposal (Revert "Run Out Fairly" after IPv4 depletion)
by Emilio Madaio 03 Sep '12

03 Sep '12

Dear Colleagues A proposed change to RIPE Document ripe-553, "IPv4 Address Allocation and Assignment Policy for the RIPE NCC Service Region", is now available for discussion. You can find the full proposal at: https://www.ripe.net/ripe/policies/proposals/2012-06 We encourage you to review this proposal and send your comments to <address-policy-wg(a)ripe.net> before 1 October 2012. Regards Emilio Madaio Policy Development Officer RIPE NCC

1 0

2012-05 Review Period extended until 17 September 2012 (Transparency in Address Block Transfers)
by Emilio Madaio 03 Sep '12

03 Sep '12

Dear Colleagues, The Review Period for the proposed change to RIPE Document ripe-553 has been extended until 17 September 2012. You can find the full proposal at: https://www.ripe.net/ripe/policies/proposals/2012-05 We encourage you to review this policy proposal and send your comments to <address-policy-wg(a)ripe.net>. Regards, Emilio Madaio Policy Development Officer RIPE NCC

1 0

Re: [address-policy-wg] 2012-05 New Draft Document and Impact Analysis Published (Transparency in Address Block Transfers)
by Brenden Kuerbis 29 Aug '12

29 Aug '12

I believe some comments were previously expressed: http://www.ripe.net/ripe/mail/archives/address-policy-wg/2012-August/007031… I support those comments. I also agree with the portion of RIPE's impact analysis which proposes to anonymize refused transfer data. The point of having that particular data is to see how much is being refused, rather than to know specifically who was refused. Regards, --------------------------------------- Brenden Kuerbis Postdoctoral Fellow, Citizen Lab, Munk School of Global Affairs, University of Toronto || http://citizenlab.org Postdoctoral Researcher, iSchool, Syracuse University || http://internetgovernance.org <http://internetgovernance.org> On Wed, Aug 29, 2012 at 8:34 AM, Sander Steffann <sander(a)steffann.nl> wrote: > Dear Address Policy WG, > > There has been no feedback on policy proposal 2012-05 since it entered the > review phase: > > > The draft document for the proposal described in 2012-05, > > "Transparency in Address Block Transfers", has been published. The > > Impact Analysis that was conducted for this proposal has also been > > published. > > > > You can find the full proposal at: > > > > https://www.ripe.net/ripe/policies/proposals/2012-05 > > > > and the draft document at: > > > > https://www.ripe.net/ripe/policies/proposals/2012-05/draft > > > > We encourage you to read the draft document text and send any comments > > to address-policy-wg(a)ripe.net before 31 August 2012. > > We have almost reached the end of the review phase. Without feedback from > the WG this policy proposal cannot proceed. Please let us know what you > think of this policy proposal, or if you think more time is needed to > discuss it. > > Thank you, > Sander Steffann > APWG Co-chair > > > > >

2 1

2012-04 Draft Document and Impact Analysis in the making (PI Assignment from the Last /8)
by Emilio Madaio 23 Aug '12

23 Aug '12

Dear colleagues, As previously announced, the discussion period for the proposed change to RIPE Document ripe-553, "IPv4 Address Allocation and Assignment Policies for the RIPE NCC Service Region", has ended. A Draft Policy text and the Impact Analysis were due to move the proposal to Review Phase. While performing the Impact Analysis, RIPE NCC staff have identified a number of additional points to review in light of past discussions relating to IP address management and overall RIPE NCC membership. Therefore, in agreement with the Address Policy Working Group Co-chairs and the author of the proposal, we have decided to invest some more time in the analysis. The RIPE NCC will publish all relevant documentation in the coming weeks, and the proposal will move to the Review Phase prior to the RIPE 65 Meeting. You can find the full proposal at: https://www.ripe.net/ripe/policies/proposals/2012-04 Apologies for any inconvenience Regards Emilio Madaio Policy Development Officer RIPE NCC

1 0

RIPE65 - Agenda, first draft
by Gert Doering 14 Aug '12

14 Aug '12

Hi APWG folks, RIPE meeting orga, below you can find a draft for the RIPE address policy WG meeting's agenda, which will take place in Amsterdam in the following two time slots: Thursday, Sep 27, 09:00 - 10:30 Thursday, Sep 27, 11:00 - 12:30 The exact time lines depend a bit on how much discussion is going on, so we might move items one time slot "up" or "down". If you have anything else you want to see on the agenda, or of we need to change anything, please let us know. regards, Gert Doering, APWG chair ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Thursday, 09:00-10:30 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- A. Administrative Matters 5 min (welcome, thanking the scribe, approving the minutes, etc.) B. Current Policy Topics - Emilio Madaio - global policy overview "what's going on?" - common policy topics in all regions (end of IPv4, transfers, ...) - overview over concluded proposals in the RIPE region since RIPE64 - brief overview over new proposals (if any) D. Feedback From NCC Registration Service - Alex le Heux F. Discussion of open policy proposals 2012-02 Policy for Inter-RIR transfers of IPv4 Address Space 2012-03 Intra-RIR transfer policy proposal 2012-04 (IPv4) PI assignments from the last /8 2012-05 Transparency in Address Block Transfers <new> IPv6 PA/PI unification proposal ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Thursday, 11:00-12:30 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- G. Discussion of open policy proposals (continued) H. IPv4 maintenance policy - Rob Blokzijl (bring topic back into people's minds, agree on next steps) Y. Open Policy Hour "The Open Policy Hour (OPH) is a showcase for your policy ideas. If you have a policy proposal you'd like to debut, prior to formally submitting it, here is your opportunity." Z. AOB

1 0

Policy/practice on holding back space before reallocation?
by Heather Schiller 13 Aug '12

13 Aug '12

I have not been able to find this info on RIPE's website. Does anyone know the amount of time RIPE holds back a 'deregistered number resource' before allocating it? I found this document that describes the deregistration process for a resource holder: https://www.ripe.net/ripe/docs/ripe-517 In general it gives the resource holder 4 weeks to object and 3 months to remediate. It does not describe how long RIPE will hold back deregistered IP's before allocating them out again. For example, ARIN used to hold back for one year.. they recently announced they were preparing to drop from 6 months hold to 3 months hold - here is the announcement: https://www.arin.net/announcements/2012/20120717.html It's way down 3rd paragraph from the end. "One last change relates to the amount of time that ARIN will hold recovered IPv4 resources prior to reissuance. The hold time for all returned, reclaimed and revoked IPv4 resources will be reduced from six to three months." Does RIPE have a similar practice. Thanks, --Heather

1 0