2015-04 New Draft Documents and Impact Analysis Published (RIPE Resource Transfer Policies)
Dear colleagues, The draft documents for version 2.0 of the policy proposal 2015-04, "RIPE Resource Transfer Policies" have now been published, along with an impact analysis conducted by the RIPE NCC. The goal of this proposal is to create a single document with all relevant information regarding the transfer of Internet number resources. The key difference from version 1.0 is clarification in the policy text and policy summary regarding the 24-month holding period for scarce resources. You can find the full proposal and the impact analysis at: https://www.ripe.net/participate/policies/proposals/2015-04 And the draft documents at: https://www.ripe.net/participate/policies/proposals/2015-04/draft We encourage you to read the draft document and send any comments to <address-policy-wg@ripe.net> before 16 December 2015. Regards Marco Schmidt Policy Development Officer RIPE NCC
Hello working group,
You can find the full proposal and the impact analysis at: https://www.ripe.net/participate/policies/proposals/2015-04
Thanks to Marco and the rest of the RIPE NCC for this extensive impact analysis. This impact analysis uncovers a very serious issue that has slipped under our radar in the "Entities That Can Receive a Transfer". The issue raised from the RIPE NCC Executive Board looks completely legitimate to us. For those of you who haven't read the impact analysis yet, this is the core of the issue:
The RIPE NCC impact analysis notes that acceptance of this proposal could significantly affect the stability of the RIR system as a whole by allowing transfer of any resource (including assigned PA space) to any entity including one that is not a member of the RIPE NCC (or any other RIR).
This is a serious issue that will affect all of us. The chairs take this issue into the consensus-reaching process and we ask the authors and working group to address this. Your working group chairs, Gert and Sander
Dear Colleagues, we have all to thank Eric for the hard work done. When the proposal apperead I thought it was good and would approve such content. In its essence is really fair and clean but the matter is highly complicated. I agree with the board and even Eric evaluated this kind of problem in his Rational analisys Opposing the proposal when he says the word slight change make the document generic. Generic in this case makes it dangerous. I would take care also of board point here: [...] This has the potential to complicate future policy development activity, and it is expected that increased efforts will be needed to explain to the RIPE NCC membership and other stakeholders which policy document applies in which situations, [...] More colleages consider that standing to the Board opinion (and I agree) this will not affect in any way m&a and maybe we will never have a document that does it for many reasons. My opinion is to do not touch anaything at this time. We can ask the Board to consider the matter of entity and more Local Internet Registries. Yes the answer is still yes it is legitime, let it be like other thinks happened in the past and do your best to think 6. If the answer is no it can be touched maybe we can do something on that and slow down a potencial growing burning trend. kind regads Riccardo Il 17/11/2015 18:01, Sander Steffann ha scritto:
Hello working group,
You can find the full proposal and the impact analysis at: https://www.ripe.net/participate/policies/proposals/2015-04 Thanks to Marco and the rest of the RIPE NCC for this extensive impact analysis.
This impact analysis uncovers a very serious issue that has slipped under our radar in the "Entities That Can Receive a Transfer". The issue raised from the RIPE NCC Executive Board looks completely legitimate to us.
For those of you who haven't read the impact analysis yet, this is the core of the issue:
The RIPE NCC impact analysis notes that acceptance of this proposal could significantly affect the stability of the RIR system as a whole by allowing transfer of any resource (including assigned PA space) to any entity including one that is not a member of the RIPE NCC (or any other RIR). This is a serious issue that will affect all of us. The chairs take this issue into the consensus-reaching process and we ask the authors and working group to address this.
Your working group chairs, Gert and Sander
-- Ing. Riccardo Gori e-mail: rgori@wirem.net Mobile: +39 339 8925947 Mobile: +34 602 009 437 WIREM Fiber Revolution - Net-IT s.r.l. Via Emilia Ponente, 1667 47522 Cesena (FC) Tel +39 0547 1955485 Fax +39 0547 1950285 e-mail: info@wirem.net -------------------------------------------------------------------- CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE This message and its attachments are addressed solely to the persons above and may contain confidential information. If you have received the message in error, be informed that any use of the content hereof is prohibited. Please return it immediately to the sender and delete the message. Should you have any questions, please contact us by re- plying to info@wirem.net Thank you WIREM - Net-IT s.r.l. via Emilia Ponente, 1667 - 47522 Cesena (FC) --------------------------------------------------------------------
On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 6:01 PM, Sander Steffann <sander@steffann.nl> wrote:
Hello working group,
You can find the full proposal and the impact analysis at: https://www.ripe.net/participate/policies/proposals/2015-04
Thanks to Marco and the rest of the RIPE NCC for this extensive impact analysis.
+1, this impact analysis was also a pleasure to read for this n00b.
This impact analysis uncovers a very serious issue that has slipped under our radar in the "Entities That Can Receive a Transfer". The issue raised from the RIPE NCC Executive Board looks completely legitimate to us.
For those of you who haven't read the impact analysis yet, this is the core of the issue:
The RIPE NCC impact analysis notes that acceptance of this proposal could significantly affect the stability of the RIR system as a whole by allowing transfer of any resource (including assigned PA space) to any entity including one that is not a member of the RIPE NCC (or any other RIR).
This is a serious issue that will affect all of us. The chairs take this issue into the consensus-reaching process and we ask the authors and working group to address this.
I didn't anticipate this issue, either, and I agree that the RIPE NCC's concerns are valid and real. Shouldn't this be a rather straightforward thing to fix in the proposal? Or am I missing something here? -- Jan
Hi, On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 08:44:17PM +0100, Jan Ingvoldstad wrote:
This is a serious issue that will affect all of us. The chairs take this issue into the consensus-reaching process and we ask the authors and working group to address this.
I didn't anticipate this issue, either, and I agree that the RIPE NCC's concerns are valid and real.
Shouldn't this be a rather straightforward thing to fix in the proposal?
Or am I missing something here?
Since the intentions basically are to do "the right thing" (so, PA blocks can only be transferred to LIRs or "member of other RIRs", not to "anyone having a contract", etc.) and just the wording got simplified too much, I do not see unforeseeable problems here. If there is consensus otherwise to go forward, this will need a textual change that very clearly states in no unclear terms what can be done (and by omission, what can not be done), and another impact analysis - so, one extra round through the PDP. But it is not the first time that the IA uncovered wording that needs to be clarified "if read by an outsider", so it's good that we have it :-) 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 (0)89/32356-444 USt-IdNr.: DE813185279
On 17/11/2015 22:55, Gert Doering wrote:
Hi,
On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 08:44:17PM +0100, Jan Ingvoldstad wrote:
This is a serious issue that will affect all of us. The chairs take this issue into the consensus-reaching process and we ask the authors and working group to address this. I didn't anticipate this issue, either, and I agree that the RIPE NCC's concerns are valid and real.
Shouldn't this be a rather straightforward thing to fix in the proposal?
Or am I missing something here? Since the intentions basically are to do "the right thing" (so, PA blocks can only be transferred to LIRs or "member of other RIRs", not to "anyone having a contract", etc.) and just the wording got simplified too much, I do not see unforeseeable problems here.
If there is consensus otherwise to go forward, this will need a textual change that very clearly states in no unclear terms what can be done (and by omission, what can not be done), and another impact analysis - so, one extra round through the PDP. But it is not the first time that the IA uncovered wording that needs to be clarified "if read by an outsider", so it's good that we have it :-)
And of course the NCC can't fix the problem. That is up to the community. Nigel
Hi, On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 10:58:36PM +0200, Nigel Titley wrote:
If there is consensus otherwise to go forward, this will need a textual change that very clearly states in no unclear terms what can be done (and by omission, what can not be done), and another impact analysis - so, one extra round through the PDP. But it is not the first time that the IA uncovered wording that needs to be clarified "if read by an outsider", so it's good that we have it :-)
And of course the NCC can't fix the problem. That is up to the community.
Right. Erik to provide new text and the community to agree on that :-) And then the board to verify that we make our intentions really clear (thanks again). 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 (0)89/32356-444 USt-IdNr.: DE813185279
participants (6)
-
Gert Doering -
Jan Ingvoldstad -
Marco Schmidt -
Nigel Titley -
Riccardo Gori -
Sander Steffann