Hi, On Thu, Oct 06, 2022 at 01:44:51PM +0200, James Kennedy wrote:
Re: next steps ??? does the APWG see any value in exploring this topic further in its current or any other form?
Speaking as an individual member of the APWG: not in this form, not with the line of arguments and justification given in this proposal. Let's agree on a problem statement first. "We no longer need to ask for more v4 space" is not a very compelling one. My take on "if the problem statement is that different LIRs fill the RIPE DB with data of very different granularity, and this is oh so inconsistent!" is still that this is not a problem policy changes will solve (unless you disallow registering ANY assignments, and remove ALL existing objects = consistency) but that might be better tackled by a BCP document, explaining to LIRs what "the community" expects them to do. It will still not magically fix different mindsets - or vastly different customer bases - between LIRs, but at least for those that *are* seeking for guidance ("should I register individual /32s, or preferably only the whole block, and if yes, why?") we can create some. Gert Doering -- LIR admin -- 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