Feedback needed for 2018-03 (Fixing Outdated Information in the IPv4 Policy)
Dear All, Policy proposal 2018-03 aims at fixing outdated information in IPv4 Policy, like outdated references or values of inetnum objects in the RIPE Database. While I am aware this is not the most exciting of the current policy proposals, it is important to keep the content of the IPv4 policy up-to-date. The review phase for this proposed policy change will end this week, and in order to proceed with the PDP this proposal needs your input, whether you support or oppose the changes. You can find the full proposal here: https://www.ripe.net/participate/policies/proposals/2018-03 Thank you in advance for your support and best regards, Andrea Cima RIPE NCC
Greetings! I support it. It's good idea to keep docs up to date. Nikolay On 16.07.2018 17:29, Andrea Cima wrote:
Dear All,
Policy proposal 2018-03 aims at fixing outdated information in IPv4 Policy, like outdated references or values of inetnum objects in the RIPE Database.
While I am aware this is not the most exciting of the current policy proposals, it is important to keep the content of the IPv4 policy up-to-date. The review phase for this proposed policy change will end this week, and in order to proceed with the PDP this proposal needs your input, whether you support or oppose the changes.
You can find the full proposal here: https://www.ripe.net/participate/policies/proposals/2018-03
Thank you in advance for your support and best regards,
Andrea Cima
RIPE NCC
c. The RIPE NCC, in cooperation with the receiving party, and in compliance with RIPE Policies, will determine the status that the resources to be transferred will receive once they are registered in the RIPE Registry. Hi Andrea, Per the section of the Ripe policy regarding inter-regional transfers extracted above, we have seen recipients of inter-regional transfers into RIPE choose to designate their received space as Allocated-PI. Is this still allowed? The proposal under consideration obsoletes the designation Allocated-PI. Regards, Mike Burns -----Original Message----- From: address-policy-wg [mailto:address-policy-wg-bounces@ripe.net] On Behalf Of Andrea Cima Sent: Monday, July 16, 2018 10:30 AM To: address-policy-wg@ripe.net Subject: [address-policy-wg] Feedback needed for 2018-03 (Fixing Outdated Information in the IPv4 Policy) Dear All, Policy proposal 2018-03 aims at fixing outdated information in IPv4 Policy, like outdated references or values of inetnum objects in the RIPE Database. While I am aware this is not the most exciting of the current policy proposals, it is important to keep the content of the IPv4 policy up-to-date. The review phase for this proposed policy change will end this week, and in order to proceed with the PDP this proposal needs your input, whether you support or oppose the changes. You can find the full proposal here: https://www.ripe.net/participate/policies/proposals/2018-03 Thank you in advance for your support and best regards, Andrea Cima RIPE NCC
Hi Mike, Thank you for your question. During an Inter-RIR transfer we have never been asked to register resources with the status ALLOCATED PI. This is due to the fact that neither ARIN nor APNIC are using the status ALLOCATED PI in their databases. Furthermore holders of Legacy resources being transferred to the RIPE region can choose to retain to the Legacy status or convert the status to ALLOCATED PA or ASSIGNED PI. The RIPE Community decided that the status ALLOCATED PI is outdated and conflicts with current policies in regards to the registration requirements for independent resources. For this reason the RIPE NCC has been running a project converting, in cooperation with resource holders, all IPv4 ranges with status ALLOCATED PI to either ALLOCATED PA or ASSIGNED PI. As a consequence the RIPE Database does not contain anymore inetnum objects with the status ALLOCATED PI. This is one of the reasons why this proposal suggests removing such outdated information from the IPv4 policy. I hope this clarifies your question. Do you have an opinion about this policy proposal? Thank you again and best regards, Andrea Cima RIPE NCC On 16/07/2018 16:48, Mike Burns wrote:
c. The RIPE NCC, in cooperation with the receiving party, and in compliance with RIPE Policies, will determine the status that the resources to be transferred will receive once they are registered in the RIPE Registry.
Hi Andrea,
Per the section of the Ripe policy regarding inter-regional transfers extracted above, we have seen recipients of inter-regional transfers into RIPE choose to designate their received space as Allocated-PI. Is this still allowed?
The proposal under consideration obsoletes the designation Allocated-PI.
Regards, Mike Burns
-----Original Message----- From: address-policy-wg [mailto:address-policy-wg-bounces@ripe.net] On Behalf Of Andrea Cima Sent: Monday, July 16, 2018 10:30 AM To: address-policy-wg@ripe.net Subject: [address-policy-wg] Feedback needed for 2018-03 (Fixing Outdated Information in the IPv4 Policy)
Dear All,
Policy proposal 2018-03 aims at fixing outdated information in IPv4 Policy, like outdated references or values of inetnum objects in the RIPE Database.
While I am aware this is not the most exciting of the current policy proposals, it is important to keep the content of the IPv4 policy up-to-date. The review phase for this proposed policy change will end this week, and in order to proceed with the PDP this proposal needs your input, whether you support or oppose the changes.
You can find the full proposal here: https://www.ripe.net/participate/policies/proposals/2018-03
Thank you in advance for your support and best regards,
Andrea Cima
RIPE NCC
Thanks Andrea, you're correct, I mixed up Allocated-PI and Assigned-PI. I support the 2018-03 and attempts to clarify the many status categories. Regards, Mike -----Original Message----- From: Andrea Cima [mailto:andrea@ripe.net] Sent: Tuesday, July 17, 2018 8:30 AM To: Mike Burns <mike@iptrading.com>; address-policy-wg@ripe.net Subject: Re: [address-policy-wg] Feedback needed for 2018-03 (Fixing Outdated Information in the IPv4 Policy) Hi Mike, Thank you for your question. During an Inter-RIR transfer we have never been asked to register resources with the status ALLOCATED PI. This is due to the fact that neither ARIN nor APNIC are using the status ALLOCATED PI in their databases. Furthermore holders of Legacy resources being transferred to the RIPE region can choose to retain to the Legacy status or convert the status to ALLOCATED PA or ASSIGNED PI. The RIPE Community decided that the status ALLOCATED PI is outdated and conflicts with current policies in regards to the registration requirements for independent resources. For this reason the RIPE NCC has been running a project converting, in cooperation with resource holders, all IPv4 ranges with status ALLOCATED PI to either ALLOCATED PA or ASSIGNED PI. As a consequence the RIPE Database does not contain anymore inetnum objects with the status ALLOCATED PI. This is one of the reasons why this proposal suggests removing such outdated information from the IPv4 policy. I hope this clarifies your question. Do you have an opinion about this policy proposal? Thank you again and best regards, Andrea Cima RIPE NCC On 16/07/2018 16:48, Mike Burns wrote:
c. The RIPE NCC, in cooperation with the receiving party, and in compliance with RIPE Policies, will determine the status that the resources to be transferred will receive once they are registered in the RIPE Registry.
Hi Andrea,
Per the section of the Ripe policy regarding inter-regional transfers extracted above, we have seen recipients of inter-regional transfers into RIPE choose to designate their received space as Allocated-PI. Is this still allowed?
The proposal under consideration obsoletes the designation Allocated-PI.
Regards, Mike Burns
-----Original Message----- From: address-policy-wg [mailto:address-policy-wg-bounces@ripe.net] On Behalf Of Andrea Cima Sent: Monday, July 16, 2018 10:30 AM To: address-policy-wg@ripe.net Subject: [address-policy-wg] Feedback needed for 2018-03 (Fixing Outdated Information in the IPv4 Policy)
Dear All,
Policy proposal 2018-03 aims at fixing outdated information in IPv4 Policy, like outdated references or values of inetnum objects in the RIPE Database.
While I am aware this is not the most exciting of the current policy proposals, it is important to keep the content of the IPv4 policy up-to-date. The review phase for this proposed policy change will end this week, and in order to proceed with the PDP this proposal needs your input, whether you support or oppose the changes.
You can find the full proposal here: https://www.ripe.net/participate/policies/proposals/2018-03
Thank you in advance for your support and best regards,
Andrea Cima
RIPE NCC
Dear Andrea, please do go forward with that. I support the proposal. Piotr -- Piotr Strzyżewski Silesian University of Technology, Computer Centre Gliwice, Poland
Dear Colleagues, We support the proposal. With Kind Regards, Dominik Nowacki Clouvider Limited is a limited company registered in England and Wales. Registered number: 08750969<tel:08750969>. Registered office: 88 Wood Street, London, United Kingdom, EC2V 7RS. Please note that Clouvider Limited may monitor email traffic data and also the content of email for the purposes of security and staff training. This message contains confidential information and is intended only for the intended recipient. If you do not believe you are the intended recipient you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notify abuse@clouvider.net<mailto:abuse@clouvider.net> of this e-mail immediately by e-mail if you have received this e-mail by mistake and delete this e-mail from your system. E-mail transmission cannot be guaranteed to be secure or error-free as information could be intercepted, corrupted, lost, destroyed, arrive late or incomplete, or contain viruses. Clouvider Limited nor any of its employees therefore does not accept liability for any errors or omissions in the contents of this message, which arise as a result of e-mail transmission. If verification is required please request a hard-copy version. On 17 Jul 2018, at 19:42, Piotr Strzyzewski <Piotr.Strzyzewski@polsl.pl<mailto:Piotr.Strzyzewski@polsl.pl>> wrote: Dear Andrea, please do go forward with that. I support the proposal. Piotr -- Piotr Strzyżewski Silesian University of Technology, Computer Centre Gliwice, Poland
Hi Andrea,
Policy proposal 2018-03 aims at fixing outdated information in IPv4 Policy, like outdated references or values of inetnum objects in the RIPE Database.
While I am aware this is not the most exciting of the current policy proposals, it is important to keep the content of the IPv4 policy up-to-date. The review phase for this proposed policy change will end this week, and in order to proceed with the PDP this proposal needs your input, whether you support or oppose the changes.
Strong support, keeping our policy documents clean and relevant is important. Outdated information needs to go or be fixed. Otherwise newcomers will have a hard time (ok, an even harder time) making sense of it all. Cheers! Sander
participants (6)
-
Andrea Cima -
Dominik Nowacki -
Mike Burns -
Network Operation Center -
Piotr Strzyzewski -
Sander Steffann