Re: [address-policy-wg] 2014-12 New Policy Proposal (Allow IPv6 Transfers)
On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 12:43 PM, Marco Schmidt <mschmidt@ripe.net> wrote:
Dear colleagues,
A proposed change to RIPE Document ripe-589, "IPv6 Address Allocation and Assignment Policy" is now available for discussion.
You can find the full proposal at:
https://www.ripe.net/ripe/policies/proposals/2014-12
We encourage you to review this proposal and send your comments to <address-policy-wg@ripe.net> before 28 November 2014.
Sorry for not fully support this as everyone else has done so far :-) I support the idea and we really need it, but I have mixed feelings about two words in "section 8.0 Transfer of IPv6 resources" it is in the first sentence: "Any holder of IPv6 address space is allowed to transfer complete or partial blocks of IPv6 address space that were previously allocated or assigned to them by the RIPE NCC or otherwise through the Regional Internet Registry system." Do we really need to have "... or partial" there? Do we understand the consequences of those two words? ... yes I do see several cases where it those two words will save the day, and the amount of abuse is limited but still I'll wonder if we really need it. -- Roger Jorgensen | ROJO9-RIPE rogerj@gmail.com | - IPv6 is The Key! http://www.jorgensen.no | roger@jorgensen.no
Hi Roger,
Sorry for not fully support this as everyone else has done so far :-)
I support the idea and we really need it, but I have mixed feelings about two words in "section 8.0 Transfer of IPv6 resources" it is in the first sentence:
"Any holder of IPv6 address space is allowed to transfer complete or partial blocks of IPv6 address space that were previously allocated or assigned to them by the RIPE NCC or otherwise through the Regional Internet Registry system."
Do we really need to have "... or partial" there?
Yes we do.
Do we understand the consequences of those two words?
Reality of those 2 words are : In case a company decides to split, sell part of their infrastructure or activities, they would be able to do so. The receiving party will have to be a LIR. They would probably already have an v6 Allocation. Resulting that the transfer would require documentation as it would be seen as a subsequent allocation. (http://www.ripe.net/ripe/docs/ripe-589#subsequent_allocation) I am not saying that it will be easy to do this and because of that, it will not be able to hoard loads of v6 in a single LIR by just doing transfers.
... yes I do see several cases where it those two words will save the day, and the amount of abuse is limited but still I'll wonder if we really need it.
The goal is to align policy with reality ... and need for the people in the community. Reality today is that this particular lack within the policy is blocking some things people want to do for very valid reasons. Regards, Erik Bais
participants (2)
-
Erik Bais -
Roger Jørgensen