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

Re: [address-policy-wg] [policy-announce] 2011-05 Last Call for Comments (Safeguarding future IXPs with IPv4 space)
by Erik Bais 08 May '12

08 May '12

> You can find the full proposal at: > https://www.ripe.net/ripe/policies/proposals/2011-05 > Please e-mail any final comments about this proposal to address-policy-wg(a)ripe.net before 9 May 2012. I have 1 question before the last-call ends tomorrow. . . In the grand scheme of things and also seeing the other policies popping up for trying to divide whatever is going to be left from the final /8. If we all think that this reservation is a good thing for the good of the internet ... (And I agree on the reasoning) is reserving only a /16 from the final /8 enough? 65k /24's are in the last /8 ... and for future IXP's we 'only' reserve a /16 (256 /24's ) I would rather see that increased to a /14 if possible. Regards, Erik Bais

6 6

Ratification of the Global Policy Proposal 2011-01, "Global Policy for post, exhaustion IPv4 allocation mechanisms by the IANA"
by Emilio Madaio 08 May '12

08 May '12

Dear colleagues, The Global Policy Proposal 2011-01, "Global Policy for post exhaustion IPv4 allocation mechanisms by the IANA" was accepted by the RIPE community in October 2011. The ICANN Board recently ratified the global policy proposal. The resolution is now available at: http://www.icann.org/en/groups/board/documents/resolutions-06may12-en.htm The new RIPE document is ripe-529 and is available at: http://www.ripe.net/ripe/docs/ripe-529 Best regards, Emilio Madaio Policy Development Officer RIPE NCC

1 0

Re: [address-policy-wg] 2012-04 New Policy Proposal (PI Assignments from the last /8)
by Dan Luedtke 07 May '12

07 May '12

On Mon, May 7, 2012 at 4:18 PM, Emilio Madaio <emadaio(a)ripe.net> wrote: > A proposed change to RIPE Document ripe-530, "IPv4 Address Allocation > and Assignment Policy for the RIPE NCC Service Region", is now > available for discussion. I support this proposal. > It is likely that PI assignments from the last /8 will cause the last /8 to be consumed faster than if PI assignments were prohibited. That's a pro in my opinion. Regards Dan -- Dan Luedtke http://www.danrl.de

1 0

Re: [address-policy-wg] 2012-04 New Policy Proposal (PI Assignments from the last /8)
by Daniel Roesen 07 May '12

07 May '12

On Mon, May 07, 2012 at 04:18:52PM +0200, Emilio Madaio wrote: > A proposed change to RIPE Document ripe-530, "IPv4 Address Allocation > and Assignment Policy for the RIPE NCC Service Region", is now > available for discussion. I support this policy change proposal. It makes no sense to me to disallow PI allocation within the last /8. Best regards, Daniel -- CLUE-RIPE -- Jabber: dr(a)cluenet.de -- dr@IRCnet -- PGP: 0xA85C8AA0

1 0

Re: [address-policy-wg] 2012-04 New Policy Proposal (PI Assignments from the last /8)
by chrish＠consol.net 07 May '12

07 May '12

hi! > https://www.ripe.net/ripe/policies/proposals/2012-04 i'd like to support this. regards, Chris

1 0

2012-04 New Policy Proposal (PI Assignments from the last /8)
by Emilio Madaio 07 May '12

07 May '12

Dear Colleagues, A proposed change to RIPE Document ripe-530, "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/2012-04 We encourage you to review this proposal and send your comments to <address-policy-wg(a)ripe.net> before 4 June 2012. Regards Emilio Madaio Policy Development Officer RIPE NCC

1 0

2012-01 Policy Proposal Withdrawn (Inter-RIR Address Transfers)
by Emilio Madaio 01 May '12

01 May '12

Dear Colleagues, The proposal 2012-01,"Inter-RIR Address Transfers", has been withdrawn. It is now archived and can be found at: https://www.ripe.net/ripe/policies/archived-policy-proposals/proposals/2012… Reason for withdrawal:With respect to 2012-01, after the feedback and discussion at the RIPE 64 Meeting, the proposer decided to collaborate with other community members in submitting another policy proposal related to IPv4 transfers. Therefore the proposer decided to withdraw this proposal. Best Regards Emilio Madaio Policy Development Officer RIPE NCC

1 0

Cosmetic Surgery Project: Extended Review Period on New Draft, Document for Reverse Address Delegation of IPv4 and IPv6 Address Space
by Emilio Madaio 26 Apr '12

26 Apr '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". A draft 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 Address Policy Working Group Co-Chairs decided to extend the review period until 24 May 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(a)ripe.net>. Kind regards, Emilio Madaio Policy Development Officer RIPE NCC

2 1

Re: [address-policy-wg] IPv4 Maintenance Policy
by Hank Nussbacher 25 Apr '12

25 Apr '12

At 02:42 PM 4/19/2012 +0000, Milton L Mueller wrote: >This aspect of the policy regarding legacy holders needs clarification: > >"Leave data as it is in the RIPE Registry. The Legacy Resource Holder will >not be able to add to or alter their data and will not have access to any >RIPE NCC services such as reverse delegation and certification." > >It is likely that in response to this policy legacy holders will choose to >use an alternate registrar for the services you are precluding them from >using (e.g., reverse delegation and certification). In that case RIPE NCC >will need to negotiate an interoperability or interconnection agreement >with these service alternate providers to ensure that a globally >applicable unique registration occurs. > >If RIPE NCC is not willing to do that, it appears to be attempting to >leverage its monopoly to force legacy holders into purchase and use of >their services, something that raises obvious competition policy issues. I >wouldn't advise you to do down that path. The problem is not so much the whois database but rather the delegated file which is the more "official" data for all RIRs: ftp://ftp.ripe.net/pub/stats/ripencc/delegated-ripencc-latest When ARIN and RIPE did their ERX thing in 2003, ARIN mistakenly transferred 4600+ IP blocks to RIPE with country=EU rather than country=xx. There are numerous software packages that use the delegated data to do geolocation. Examples: http://code.google.com/p/ci-geoip/ http://16bytes.com/geo_locating-html/ https://metacpan.org/module/IP::Country::DB_File::Builder http://www.codecodex.com/wiki/IP_Address_to_Country So your IP block would not say your country code but rather EU. There is one commercial firewall that uses the delegated data incorrectly as well and hides the details behind something more powerful than a firewall - a lawyerwall. RIPE NCC is unwilling to fix this, unless one submits the legacy IP space to be listed under a LIR. -Hank

8 15

Minutes from RIPE 63: final
by Gert Doering 24 Apr '12

24 Apr '12

Dear AP WG, the minutes from RIPE 63 have been declared "final" and can be found online at https://www.ripe.net/ripe/groups/wg/ap/minutes/minutes-from-ripe-63 thanks again to the scribes for a huge piece of work well done. Gert Doering -- APWG chair -- have you enabled IPv6 on something today...? SpaceNet AG Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann D-80807 Muenchen HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen) Tel: +49 (89) 32356-444 USt-IdNr.: DE813185279

1 0