September 2008 - address-policy-wg

Fwd: Re: [address-policy-wg] Re: Revised 2007-01 set back to Review Phase (Direct Internet Resource Assignments to End Users from the RIPE NCC)
by Niall O'Reilly 09 Sep '08

09 Sep '08

I'm sorry, I meant to send this to the list, "out loud" rather than as an aside to Gert. ------- Forwarded message ------- From: "Niall O'Reilly" <Niall.oReilly(a)ucd.ie> To: "Gert Doering" <gert(a)space.net> Cc: Niall.oReilly(a)ucd.ie Subject: Re: [address-policy-wg] Re: Revised 2007-01 set back to Review Phase (Direct Internet Resource Assignments to End Users from the RIPE NCC) Date: Tue, 09 Sep 2008 14:44:25 +0100 On Thu, 04 Sep 2008 09:43:03 +0100, Gert Doering <gert(a)space.net> wrote: > Actually I'd like to hear a few more voices regarding this latest version > of 2007-01 (v4). We have deliberatly set a fairly short discussion phase > to be able to get it *done*, finally, before Dubai, so please voice your > opinions now. V4 seems fine to me. Best regards, Niall O'Reilly University College Dublin IT Services

1 0

Revised 2007-01 set back to Review Phase (Direct Internet Resource Assignments to End Users from the RIPE NCC)
by Ana Matic 09 Sep '08

09 Sep '08

PDP Number: 2007-01 Direct Internet Resource Assignments to End Users from the RIPE NCC Dear Colleagues, The text of the policy proposal 2007-01 has been revised based on the latest community feedback. We have published the new version (version 4) today. As a result a new Review Phase is set for the proposal. You can find the full proposal at: http://www.ripe.net/ripe/policies/proposals/2007-01.html and the draft documents at: http://www.ripe.net/ripe/draft-documents/ripe-424-draft2007-01-v4.html http://www.ripe.net/ripe/draft-documents/ripe-421-draft2007-01-v4.html http://www.ripe.net/ripe/draft-documents/ripe-389-draft2007-01-v4.html http://ripe.net/ripe/draft-documents/ripe-256-draft2007-01-v4.html http://www.ripe.net/ripe/draft-documents/ripe-new-draft2007-01-v4.html We encourage you to review this revised policy proposal and the draft documents and send your comments to address-policy-wg(a)ripe.net before 9 September 2008. Regards, Ana Matic RIPE NCC

2 1

2008-03 Proposal Accepted (Global Policy for the Allocation of the Remaining IPv4 Address Space)
by Filiz Yilmaz 08 Sep '08

08 Sep '08

PDP Number: 2008-03 Global Policy for the Allocation of the Remaining IPv4 Address Space Dear Colleagues, Consensus has been reached, and the proposal described in 2008-03 has been accepted by the RIPE community. You can find the full proposal at: http://www.ripe.net/ripe/policies/proposals/2008-03.html A new RIPE Document has also been published to document this new policy: ripe-436, "Global Policy for the Allocation of the Remaining IPv4 Address Space" http://www.ripe.net/ripe/docs/ripe-436.html Please note that this is a global policy and will therefore come into effect only after it has been accepted as a policy in all other RIR regions and then ratified by ICANN. Thank you for your input. Regards Filiz Yilmaz RIPE NCC Policy Development Officer

1 0

2007-04 - IANA Policy for Allocation of ASN Blocks to RIRs.
by Filiz Yilmaz 08 Sep '08

08 Sep '08

Dear Colleagues, Proposal 2007-04, Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA) Policy for Allocation of ASN Blocks to Regional Internet Registries, was accepted by the RIPE community in September 2007. This proposal has since reached consensus in all other RIR regions and it was also ratified by ICANN. Therefore, the proposal is now in effect as a global policy. You can find the policy documented at: http://www.ripe.net/ripe/docs/ripe-416.html Kind regards, Filiz Yilmaz Policy Development Officer RIPE NCC

1 0

comments on 2008-05 Anycasting Tier 0/1 ENUM
by Jim Reid 04 Sep '08

04 Sep '08

I am broadly supportive of the principle behind this proposal. However the detail needs some refinement IMO. It's not clear what is meant by "Tier-0/1" or even "ENUM". This needs to be clarified. I think we all know what we mean by these terms. But the proposal does not define them or incorporate a definition by reference. My worry here is that if "ENUM" in particular is not defined, the proposal as written opens up a pandora's box. Does it apply *exclusively* to the public e164.arpa tree? If not, which other flavours of ENUM does the proposal cover? I'm thinking here of potential implementations of Infrastructure ENUM which could be done either on the public Internet or behind closed doors between telcos: should these be entitled to a /24 for anycasting too? Let's say two telcos implement some form of Infrastructure ENUM for cross-operator routing. Will this proposal mean they will both be entitled to a /24 for their respective ENUM trees? Since telcos tend to use bi-lateral agreements, there is the prospect here of forests of ENUM trees. Each telco could well have a tree for each telco it has a bi-liateral agreement for Infrastructure ENUM and each of these trees could be entitled to a /24 for anycasting.

1 0

2007-09 Policy Proposal Withdrawn (Cooperative distribution of the end of the IPv4 free pool)
by Ana Matic 01 Sep '08

01 Sep '08

PDP Number: 2007-09 Cooperative distribution of the end of the IPv4 free pool Dear Colleagues, The proposal 2007-09, "Cooperative distribution of the end of the IPv4 free pool" has been withdrawn. The proposer decided to withdraw this proposal due to insufficient support for it. You can find the full proposal at: http://ripe.net/ripe/policies/proposals/2007-09.html Regards, Ana Matic RIPE NCC

1 0