Dear AP WG, The last call period for proposal 2015-03 (Assessment Criteria for IPv6 Initial Allocation Size) has ended. In this phase no new feedback has been sent to the working group and the working group chairs have therefore concluded that the consensus as previously announced (see below) still stands. We ask the RIPE NCC to go ahead and implement this policy. Cheers, Your working group chairs Gert & Sander On Sun, Aug 30, 2015 at 03:10:25PM +0200, Gert Doering wrote:
Dear AP WG,
On Thu, Jul 09, 2015 at 02:19:35PM +0200, Marco Schmidt wrote: [..]
The draft document for version 2.0 of the policy proposal 2015-03, "Assessment Criteria for IPv6 Initial Allocation Size", has now been published, along with an impact analysis conducted by the RIPE NCC. We encourage you to read the draft document text and send any comments to address-policy-wg@ripe.net before 7 August 2015.
the review phase for 2015-03 has ended (actually, quite a while ago, but it's vacation time... apologies).
There was a bit of discussion and thoughtful contemplations about this proposal (and I have to say, very friendly and very constructive discussion, which I appreciate :-) ). If a clear opinion was voiced regarding the proposal itself, it was always supportive.
So, I declare we have consensus, and move 2015-03 to Last Call. Marco will send the formal announcement for that in the next days.
For reference, a list of people that voiced support or opposition (or something else) in the previous review phase is appended below. This is what I have based my decision on.
If you disagree with my interpretation of what has been said and the conclusion I have drawn from it, please let us know.
Gert Doering, Address Policy WG Chair
Review Phase for V2.0, starting Jul 09, 2015
Support:
Shahin Gharghi Carsten Brueckner Tore Anderson (notes that subsequent allocations are not covered) Andre Keller (notes disagreement with the assumptions in the impact analysis regarding routing table growth, but supports proposal) Annette Suedmeyer (plans to submit a follow-up proposal covering subsequent allocations) Silvia Hagen (some thoughts about "we should not be looking at IPv6 with mostly conservation in our minds", and questions about interpretation) John Collins
Comments, Clarification:
Mathew Newton / Marco Schmidt (side clarification about the evaluation to be done by the NCC)
Tore Anderson / Mathew Newton / Sander Steffann / Jens 'Opteamax' (side discussion about subsequent allocations, returning of the initial /29 and asking for a larger *initial* allocation)
Jens 'Opteamax' / Tore Anderson (side discussion about size of the reservation done enclosing the initial allocation)
Silvia Hagen / Gert Doering / Sascha Luck / Mathew Newton / Marco Schmidt (side discussion about conservation, maths, and finding the right balance between "too liberal" and "too conservative")
Opposing voices:
- -- 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 (0)89/32356-444 USt-IdNr.: DE813185279
Gert Doering -- NetMaster -- 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 (0)89/32356-444 USt-IdNr.: DE813185279