- address-policy-wg - mailman.ripe.net

2024-02 Policy Proposal Withdrawn (IPv6 Initial Allocations /28 and extension to /28)
by Angela Dall'Ara 26 Feb '26

26 Feb '26

Dear colleagues,   The policy proposal 2024-02, "IPv6 Initial Allocations /28 and extension to /28” has been withdrawn.   This proposal aimed to change the initial IPv6 allocation size from up to /29 to up to /28 and allow the extension of one IPv6 allocation per LIR up to /28 without justification.   The proposal is archived and can be found at:  https://www.ripe.net/participate/policies/archived-policy-proposals/archive…   Reason for withdrawal:  The proposer did not feel that any further redrafting of the proposal would achieve consensus. Please note that as per RIPE Policy Development Process “After a withdrawal, anyone is free to re-introduce the topic on the mailing list.“ The PDP document can be found at: https://www.ripe.net/publications/docs/ripe-781 Kind regards, Angela Dall'Ara Policy Officer RIPE NCC

1 0

2024-02 (IPv6 Initial Allocations /28 and extension to /28)
by Leo Vegoda 25 Feb '26

25 Feb '26

Dear Address Policy WG, This proposal will not be moving forward to the next phase. We are grateful to Jordi and Rinse for making and updating the proposal. Kind regards, Alex, Franziska, and Leo, your co-chairs

1 0

Status of 2024-01 Revised IPv6 PI Assignment Policy
by Rhys Perry 25 Feb '26

25 Feb '26

Hi All, Apologies in advance if this is against the working group etiquette, as I mostly lurk here and am not too involved. Is there any update on the 2024-01 Revised IPv6 PI Assignment Policy? It was moved into its six week discussion phase on 2025-10-30, and is now apparently "Awaiting decision from proposer" according to the proposal page on ripe.net. Rhys

1 0

Addressing for other planets
by Tony Li 21 Feb '26

21 Feb '26

Hi, As part of the IETF TIPTOP working group, we are working towards enabling the Internet in outer space. We would like to direct your attention to a couple of recent Internet drafts that may be of interest: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-many-tiptop-ip-architecture/ https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-li-tiptop-address-space/ The latter has direct implications for the RIPE community, I would welcome any and all comments. Regards, Tony

7 26

Re: Addressing for other planets
by John Curran 21 Feb '26

21 Feb '26

> On Feb 20, 2026, at 5:12 PM, NEUCKENS Marc <marc.neuckens(a)proximus.com> wrote: > ... > On topic : maybe ip will not the protocol to be used for this type of communication (v4 or v6), so this discussion might not be relevant That’s actually an excellent question - perhaps these are supposed to specialized address space and not general purpose? Tony - Are these addresses going to be using standard IPv6 protocol or something else? Also, is this actually public space, i.e. is intended that existing Internet service providers may send/receive traffic to these prefixes? Thanks! /John

2 1

IPv6 Allocation Transfers – Update and Next Steps
by Marco Schmidt 16 Feb '26

16 Feb '26

Dear all, I would like to provide an update on our approach to IPv6 Allocation Transfers. Around 18 months ago, following guidance from the WG during RIPE 88, we updated our approach to IPv6 allocation transfer requests. When the receiving member already holds an IPv6 allocation, they must now demonstrate how they utilise their existing allocation or justify the need for another one, in line with policy requirements. [1] Since then, around 1,100 IPv6 allocations have been returned to the RIPE NCC instead of being transferred, since they were no longer needed or justified. This is an increase of nearly 300% compared to the previous period. At the same time, around 650 allocations were transferred where operational need was demonstrated, reflecting an overall reduction of about 75% in IPv6 allocation transfers. Now, we are still seeing organisations holding multiple IPv6 allocations accumulated over time and have therefore started a second phase of this approach. We are conducting IPv6-focused audits with selected members with 10 or more IPv6 allocations to better understand deployment plans and assess compliance with the current RIPE IPv6 policies. This may lead to further discussion in the WG, including a possible policy review. If your organisation holds multiple IPv6 allocations that are no longer needed, or if you are unsure about policy compliance, please contact Registration Services via the LIR Portal to return unused resources or request a compliance review. Kind regards, Marco Schmidt Manager Registration Services RIPE NCC [1] https://mailman.ripe.net/archives/list/address-policy-wg@ripe.net/thread/SR…

1 0

Nominations Open: New Address Policy WG Co-Chair Sought
by Leo Vegoda 10 Feb '26

10 Feb '26

Dear Address Policy Working Group, You can now nominate yourself as a potential co-chair for the Address Policy WG. You do this by writing to apwg-chairs(a)ripe.net with your name and your affiliation. Please do not self-nominate on this list. I am not seeking reselection, so we need a new co-chair. Send your nomination to apwg-chairs(a)ripe.net by 15 March. We will publish the list of candidates on 23 March. The candidates may then introduce themselves to the list. The Working Group will make its selection during the Address Policy WG session at RIPE 92 in Edinburgh. If you are interested in serving as a co-chair of this Working Group, you are welcome to speak to Alex, Franziska, or me, to learn what we do off-list. Mirjam and Anna, as RIPE Chair and Vice Chair are also happy to answer any questions you have. And, you can also seek input from RIPE NCC staff and previous co-chairs. Our selection process is documented here: https://www.ripe.net/community/wg/active-wg/ap/address-policy-wg-chair-sele… You can also read the Job Description here: https://www.ripe.net/publications/docs/ripe-692/ A RIPE Working Group Chair Training course is available at the RIPE NCC Academy: https://academy.ripe.net/enrol/index.php?id=16 Kind regards, Leo Vegoda, for the co-chairs

1 0

Discussion: IPv4 leasing transparency in the RIPE Database
by James Kennedy 10 Feb '26

10 Feb '26

Dear AP-WG, While researching for my recent MENOG25 presentation, I noticed a transparency gap around IPv4 leasing — where LIRs delegate a block of address space to third parties who then operate it. A reportedly growing practice in our region and globally, driven by legitimate organisational needs for temporary IPv4 capacity. Yet there are no clear common guidelines for how LIRs should document who actually operates leased space, resulting in inconsistent registration practices. A sample taken of 50 leased prefixes showed multiple status attributes in use, only 26% with abuse contacts, and over half with no identification of the actual operator of the address space (or the ‘lessee’). - The Problem - Back in 2021, the RIPE Database Requirements Task Force established that registration data should be accurate to "facilitate contact with and identification of the organisation holding the assignment" (RIPE-767). The Task Force also strongly recommended that where a resource holder delegates resources to another entity, this should be documented. Existing registration mechanisms can technically accommodate leasing — LIRs can create assignments or sub-allocations. But without specific guidance, these registrations frequently fail to identify the actual operator or provide functional abuse contacts. Research from the University of Twente estimated 6.1% of routed prefixes were leased in February 2025, and found leased prefixes then were 2.89× more likely to be blocklisted — a disparity that warrants examination regardless of root cause. In practice, this means: 1. Rather than the actual operator of the IP block, abuse complaints frequently reach the LIR/lessor who may have no operational control 2. WHOIS often does not identify ‘who is’ actually operating the address space - The Question - Does the WG believe this transparency gap warrants discussion? With ongoing IPv4 recycling, leasing may well become an increasingly common practice. Establishing clear registration expectations now seems preferable to addressing this retroactively. - Possible Approaches - If the WG sees value in addressing this, potential mechanisms could range from: * A policy principle: where a third party operates leased address space, they should be identifiable * Guidance on what information LIRs should document for consistency, including functional abuse contacts and lease duration * A new status attribute (e.g., "LEASED PA") to explicitly reflect this distinct type of delegation of public IP space from an LIR to a third party - Clarification - 'Standard' assignments — where the LIR provides services and retains operational involvement — are not in scope. This applies only where a third party operates the space without direct involvement from the LIR. No commercial terms or pricing need be disclosed — only who to contact and who is operating the space. - Discussion Points - * Is the transparency gap problematic enough to warrant action? * What information would be operationally useful to capture? * What implementation challenges or unintended consequences should we consider? I have already consulted with stakeholders who see value in this direction, but I'm keen to hear broader perspectives from the WG. Best regards, James Kennedy https://www.kipa.global References: University of Twente — "From Scarcity to Opportunity: Examining Abuse of the IPv4 Leasing Market" (2025): https://ris.utwente.nl/ws/portalfiles/portal/497142547/tma2025_paper18.pdf RIPE Database Requirements Task Force Report (RIPE-767): https://www.ripe.net/publications/docs/ripe-767

1 0

Re: Launch of The Internet Ecosystem Book
by Peter Anderson 09 Feb '26

09 Feb '26

*(Apologies for cross-posting)* As a researcher, I have never come across a highly intensive and inclusive book like "The Internet Ecosystem". The book englobes the whole Internet Ecosystem with the correct information compared to misleading information from blogs/wikipedia on the Internet. This book was reviewed by Vint Cerf. I have just completed the reading, I will highly recommend it and it is nice to have a copy to keep for reference. Professor Peter Anderson Head of Research ------------------------------ *From:* Nikesh B. Simmandree <nikeshbs(a)outlook.com> *Sent:* Monday, August 18, 2025 1:35 PM *To:* alac-announce(a)icann.org <alac-announce(a)icann.org>; alac(a)icann.org < alac(a)icann.org>; at-large(a)icann.org <at-large(a)icann.org>; afri-discuss(a)icann.org <afri-discuss(a)icann.org> *Subject:* Launch of The Internet Ecosystem Book Dear Community, I am thrilled to announce the launch of my book, *The Internet Ecosystem* — a comprehensive exploration of the history, architecture, governance, and future of the Internet. This book distills decades of technological evolution — from ARPANET and packet switching, to AI, Web3, quantum networks, and beyond — into a clear, engaging narrative accessible to both technical and non-technical readers *What the Book Covers* - *The Past:* How Cold War research, ARPANET, and packet switching gave birth to the Internet we know today. - *The Present:* The intricate roles of ISPs, backbone providers, cloud infrastructure, AI, cybersecurity, and global governance shaping our daily online experiences. - *The Future:* Insights into 5G/6G, blockchain, immersive technologies, quantum security, and the Internet in 2050. With *49 detailed chapters*, the book provides a definitive yet approachable reference for students, professionals, policymakers, and curious readers alike. My mission with *The Internet Ecosystem* is to make the Internet’s complexity understandable — showing not only *how* the Internet works, but also *why* it matters and has become one of the most transformative human inventions — while sparking dialogue on how we build a secure, inclusive, and sustainable digital future. In the 21st century, understanding the Internet is not optional — it’s essential. Whether you’re a business leader, policymaker, educator, student, or everyday Internet user, this book provides the context and clarity you need to navigate the opportunities and challenges of our connected world. *Get Your Copy* *The Internet Ecosystem* is now available: https://payhip.com/b/hfvYg Thank you, Best Regards, Nikesh B. Simmandree +230-5-907-3413 nikeshbs(a)outlook.com This message and its attachments are intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and are strictly confidential. If you have received this in error, please delete it from any devices after having informed the sender.

2 1

RIPE 91 Address Policy WG - Draft Minutes Published
by Leo Vegoda 07 Jan '26

07 Jan '26

Dear Address Policy WG, We have received the draft minutes for the APWG sessions at RIPE91 and the NCC has published them for your review: https://www.ripe.net/community/wg/active-wg/ap/minutes/ripe-91-address-poli… RIPE 91 Address Policy Working Group Minutes ripe.net We'd like to thank Ed and Antony from the NCC for preparing the draft for us. Please review the minutes and provide feedback if you find anything missing or incorrect. Best regards, Leo Vegoda, Alex le Heux, Franziska Lichtblau Address Policy WG co-chairs

1 0