Experimental IPv6 address allocations policy
Hi, I just recently noted that experimental IPv6 address allocations have been "sneaked in" the policy, as seen in: http://www.ripe.net/ripe/docs/ipv6policy.html#experiment-assignments I must heavily object to this for a few reasons: 1) the intent is to keep the policy uniform, and this has not been discussed in the global-v6 policy mailing list. 2) RIPE43 minutes (posted on Oct 19 2002) list that this should be turned into a draft proposal [note: the URL for the presentation does not work]; There was a draft proposal on 28 Nov 2002 on "DRAFT: Experimental Internet Resource Allocations & Assignments". This is no longer available so I cannot verify the contents. 3) On 22 Jan 2003, new RIPE documents, 263 and 267 are available; these incorporate an experimental addressing policy. To my knowledge and according to my mail archives, neither of these has *ever* been as much as mentioned in the mailing lists (either ipv6 or lir wg) - not a single message. Is this sufficient in determining this is really what community wants? To clarify, are only those organizations which meet the criteria in section 5.1.1 applicable for experimental address allocations in: http://www.ripe.net/ripe/docs/ipv6policy.html#experiment-assignments ? If the others can get experimental blocks, I'd be very much against it. -- Pekka Savola "You each name yourselves king, yet the Netcore Oy kingdom bleeds." Systems. Networks. Security. -- George R.R. Martin: A Clash of Kings
Pekka, On Thu, Apr 03, 2003 at 07:45:11PM +0300, ext Pekka Savola wrote:
I just recently noted that experimental IPv6 address allocations have been "sneaked in" the policy, as seen in:
http://www.ripe.net/ripe/docs/ipv6policy.html#experiment-assignments
I must heavily object to this for a few reasons:
1) the intent is to keep the policy uniform, and this has not been discussed in the global-v6 policy mailing list.
2) RIPE43 minutes (posted on Oct 19 2002) list that this should be turned into a draft proposal [note: the URL for the presentation does not work]; There was a draft proposal on 28 Nov 2002 on "DRAFT: Experimental Internet Resource Allocations & Assignments". This is no longer available so I cannot verify the contents.
3) On 22 Jan 2003, new RIPE documents, 263 and 267 are available; these incorporate an experimental addressing policy.
To my knowledge and according to my mail archives, neither of these has *ever* been as much as mentioned in the mailing lists (either ipv6 or lir wg) - not a single message.
I agree with your assessment. I don't agree with the procedure that was followed to get the wording on experimental addresses in the policy.
Is this sufficient in determining this is really what community wants?
No. David K. PS please post follow up messages to the lir-wg only, the lir-wg deals with policy issues. ---
Dear Pekka, The policy was proposed to the RIPE 43 meeting in Rhodes and then published as a draft for community comment. Following the comment period a further period of six weeks passed before the policy was published in a revised policy document. The changes from the previous version of the policy were recorded in the document change summary page at: <http://www.ripe.net/ripe/docs/updates.html> The same policy was proposed to the APNIC community at the APNIC 14 meeting in Kitakyushu, JP and is now provisionally active. It was also proposed to the ARIN X meeting in Eugene, OR (as 2002-2). Minor regional policy differences can exist between the regions because of those regions' differing needs. This explains why discussion initially occurs within regional communities. Nonetheless, it is clear that changing the current common policy is being discussed in the APNIC, ARIN and RIPE regions. Perhaps that discussion should be moved to the global-v6 list. It might be useful to have separate discussions for changes to the common IPv6 policy and changes to the policy development process within in our region. The policy development process can be discussed on the <lir-wg@ripe.net> mailing list. Kind regards, -- leo vegoda RIPE NCC Registration Services
On Fri, 4 Apr 2003, leo vegoda wrote:
It might be useful to have separate discussions for changes to the common IPv6 policy and changes to the policy development process within in our region. The policy development process can be discussed on the <lir-wg@ripe.net> mailing list.
A clarification request: I briefly mentioned this in the first message: Are only those organizations which meet the initial allocation criteria in section 5.1.1 applicable for experimental address allocations? (http://www.ripe.net/ripe/docs/ipv6policy.html#experiment-assignments) For example, a LIR cannot (by design) request experimental addresses for its customer; correct? This seems to be the case, but I'd like to double check. -- Pekka Savola "You each name yourselves king, yet the Netcore Oy kingdom bleeds." Systems. Networks. Security. -- George R.R. Martin: A Clash of Kings
Hi Pekka, On Fri, Apr 04, 2003 at 07:57:32PM +0300, Pekka Savola wrote:
On Fri, 4 Apr 2003, leo vegoda wrote:
It might be useful to have separate discussions for changes to the common IPv6 policy and changes to the policy development process within in our region. The policy development process can be discussed on the <lir-wg@ripe.net> mailing list.
A clarification request: I briefly mentioned this in the first message:
I apologise for missing this in my last post.
Are only those organizations which meet the initial allocation criteria in section 5.1.1 applicable for experimental address allocations? (http://www.ripe.net/ripe/docs/ipv6policy.html#experiment-assignments)
For example, a LIR cannot (by design) request experimental addresses for its customer; correct?
This seems to be the case, but I'd like to double check.
That is not how we would expect to interpret the policy. My interpretation is that the "Assignments for Internet Experiments" policy represents an exemption to the main body of the IPv6 policy. If an organisation performing an Internet experiment was not an LIR we would expect them to have their request sent in by a friendly LIR (a peer, upstream provider, etc...). Best regards, -- leo vegoda RIPE NCC Registration Services
participants (3)
-
David Kessens -
leo vegoda -
Pekka Savola