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

RE: [address-policy-wg] 2006-01 New Draft Document Published (Provider Independent (PI) IPv6 Assignments for End User Organisations)
by IP-Office KPN 11 Feb '09

11 Feb '09

All, Thank you for all replies to my question:) We support proposal 2006-01 as is and Andy's proposal to go forward. With kind regards, Andries Hettema IP-Office KPN Internet 070 45 13398 ip-office(a)kpn.com -----Original Message----- On 10 Feb 2009, at 12:47, Gert Doering wrote: > But I can see your point - there might be cases where, for whatever > reason, > a LIR might want to assign a separate network to itself, and indeed > this > is not currently covered by 2006-01. [...] > - do you want to accept 2006-01 as it is right now, in version 5.0, > and make amendments for the "LIR to itself" special case later on > (to go forward, I hear people are really waiting for it). There are significant advantages to passing "as is" with the aim of getting the policy passed quickly, because I do believe there are networks who are not LIRs waiting for v6 PI to be allowed in Europe. If others agree with my premise that an organisation's status with the NCC should not be a barrier to v6 PI, I will propose the policy to fix. Thanks Andy ________________________________________________________________________ ______________ This inbound message to KPN has been checked for all known viruses by KPN MailScan, powered by MessageLabs. For further information visit: http://www.kpn.com, keyword 'Mailscan' ________________________________________________________________________ ______________

1 0

2006-01 New Draft Document Published (Provider Independent (PI) IPv6 Assignments for End User Organisations)
by Filiz Yilmaz 11 Feb '09

11 Feb '09

PDP Number: 2006-01 Provider Independent (PI) IPv6 Assignments for End User Organisations Dear Colleagues, The text of the policy proposal 2006-01 has been revised based on the community feedback. We have published the new version (version 5.0) today. The draft document for the proposal has also been published as well as the impact analysis that was conducted for this proposal. You can find the full proposal at: http://www.ripe.net/ripe/policies/proposals/2006-01.html and the draft document at: http://www.ripe.net/ripe/draft-documents/ripe-421-draft2006-01-v5.html We encourage you to read the draft document text and send any comments to address-policy-wg(a)ripe.net before 9 March 2009. Regards Filiz Yilmaz Policy Development Officer RIPE NCC

17 21

Re: [address-policy-wg] 2006-01 New Draft Document Published (Provider Independent (PI) IPv6 Assignments for End User Organisations)
by Remco van Mook 10 Feb '09

10 Feb '09

All, I strongly support Marco's position on this. Let's get this policy done asap and deal with changes in a later document. Kind regards, Remco ----- Original Message ----- From: address-policy-wg-admin(a)ripe.net <address-policy-wg-admin(a)ripe.net> To: Gert Doering <gert(a)space.net> Cc: address-policy-wg(a)ripe.net <address-policy-wg(a)ripe.net> Sent: Tue Feb 10 13:18:35 2009 Subject: Re: [address-policy-wg] 2006-01 New Draft Document Published (Provider Independent (PI) IPv6 Assignments for End User Organisations) On 10 feb 2009, at 13:47, Gert Doering wrote: > What you ("you" as in "the community") now need to make up your mind > about > is: > > - do you want to accept 2006-01 as it is right now, in version 5.0, > and make amendments for the "LIR to itself" special case later on > (to go forward, I hear people are really waiting for it). > > - do you want to adapt 2006-01, which means "at least one extra round > of discussion/review phase". Let me voice support for 'move on as is' and discuss any changes to it in a new proposal. This whole PI thing has been on hold for too long. Groet, MarcoH This email is from Equinix Europe Limited or one of its associated/subsidiary companies. This email, and any files transmitted with it, contains information which is confidential, may be legally privileged and is solely for the use of the intended recipient. If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete this email immediately. Equinix Europe Limited. Registered Office: Quadrant House, Floor 6, 17 Thomas More Street, Thomas More Square, London E1W 1YW. Registered in England and Wales No. 6293383.

2 1

New IPv4 blocks allocated to RIPE NCC
by Alex Le Heux 10 Feb '09

10 Feb '09

[Apologies for duplicate mails] Dear Colleagues, The RIPE NCC received the IPv4 address ranges 109/8 and 178/8 from the IANA in January 2009. We will begin allocating from these ranges in the near future. The minimum allocation size from these two /8s has been set at /21. You may wish to adjust any filters you have in place accordingly. More information on the IP space administered by the RIPE NCC can be found at: https://www.ripe.net/ripe/docs/ripe-ncc-managed-address-space.html Please also note that several "pilot" prefixes are being announced from each /8. These prefixes are: 178.0.0.0/16, pingable 178.0.0.1 178.1.0.0/21, pingable 178.1.0.1 178.1.24.0/24, pingable 178.1.24.1 109.0.0.0/16, pingable 109.0.0.1 109.1.0.0/21, pingable 109.1.0.1 109.1.24.0/24, pingable 109.1.24.1 They all originate in AS12654. More information on this "pilot" activity is available in the document "De-Bogonising New Address Blocks", which can be found at: http://www.ripe.net/ripe/docs/ripe-351.html Best regards, Alex Le Heux RIPE NCC Policy Implementation Co-ordinator

1 0

AW: [address-policy-wg] 2006-01 New Draft Document Published (Provider Independent (PI) IPv6 Assignments for End User Organisations)
by Marcus.Gerdon 10 Feb '09

10 Feb '09

I can only agree with this. IPv6 PI is in progress far to long by now, so let's finally get it done. regards, Marcus ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Systemtechnik Internet / Internet Engineering Versatel West GmbH Unterste-Wilms-Strasse 29 D-44143 Dortmund Fon: +49-(0)231-399-4486 | Fax: +49-(0)231-399-4491 marcus.gerdon(a)versatel.de | www.versatel.de Sitz der Gesellschaft: Dortmund | Registergericht: Dortmund HRB 21738 Geschäftsführer: Marc Lützenkirchen, Dr. Hai Cheng, Dr. Max Padberg, Peter Schindler ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- AS8881 / AS8638 / AS13270 | MG3031-RIPE ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- > Von: address-policy-wg-admin(a)ripe.net > [mailto:address-policy-wg-admin@ripe.net] Im Auftrag von > Marco Hogewoning > Gesendet: Dienstag, 10. Februar 2009 14:19 > An: Gert Doering > Cc: address-policy-wg(a)ripe.net > Betreff: Re: [address-policy-wg] 2006-01 New Draft Document > Published (Provider Independent (PI) IPv6 Assignments for End > User Organisations) > > > On 10 feb 2009, at 13:47, Gert Doering wrote: > > > What you ("you" as in "the community") now need to make up > your mind > > about > > is: > > > > - do you want to accept 2006-01 as it is right now, in version 5.0, > > and make amendments for the "LIR to itself" special case later on > > (to go forward, I hear people are really waiting for it). > > > > - do you want to adapt 2006-01, which means "at least one > extra round > > of discussion/review phase". > > > Let me voice support for 'move on as is' and discuss any > changes to it > in a new proposal. This whole PI thing has been on hold for too long. > > Groet, > > MarcoH > >

1 0

2007-08 Implementation: IPv4 Address Allocation and Assignment Policies for the RIPE NCC Service Region
by Xavier Le Bris 27 Jan '09

27 Jan '09

[Apologies for duplicate emails] Dear Colleagues, We are pleased to announce that the policy proposed in proposal 2007-08:"Enabling Methods for Reallocation of IPv4 Resources" has been implemented. The RIPE NCC is now ready to accept requests for IPv4 address space transfers under the new policy. This proposal can be found at: http://ripe.net/ripe/policies/proposals/2007-08.html The updated 'IPv4 Address Allocation and Assignment Policies for the RIPE NCC Service Region' document is available at: http://ripe.net/ripe/docs/ripe-441.html The following RIPE document has also been updated to reflect this policy implementation: http://www.ripe.net/ripe/docs/ripe-446.html Regards, Xavier Le Bris Registration Services RIPE NCC

1 0

Resilience Featuresof IPv6, DNSSEC and MPLS and Deployment Scenarios
by Alaa Al-Din Al-Radhi 27 Jan '09

27 Jan '09

Dear Colleagues Kind regards I like to knowledge share with you this latest interesting post: http://www.enisa.europa.eu/sta/files/resilience_features.pdf Please spread the words among your colleagues and peers. Best regards Alaa Al-Din ( Aladdin ) Al-Radhi Consultant Engineer and Researcher Passionate / Advocate of: Internet, Science, technology, innovations and new frontiers. alradhi2000(a)yahoo.ca , alaalradhi(a)hotmail.com http://www.linkedin.com/in/alaaaldinalradhi http://www.pir.org/index.php?db=content/Website&tbl=About_Us&id=7#aalradhi http://akms.org/site_content.aspx?page_key=board_of_trustees&lang=en http://www.isoc.org/pubpolpillar/governance/igf-hyderabad_ambassadors.shtm l http://aso.icann.org/elections/radhi.html http://www.itu.int/ITU-D/arb/ARO_2008_work/IP-Communications/ListofDocs-tn.… http://icie.zkm.de/join#members http://alumni.depaul.edu/community/groups/International.asp __________________________________________________________________ Ask a question on any topic and get answers from real people. Go to Yahoo! Answers and share what you know at http://ca.answers.yahoo.com

2 1

IPv6 Latest Report 2009
by Alaa Al-Din Al-Radhi 18 Jan '09

18 Jan '09

Dear Colleagues A new report on IPv6. May be you find it interesting http://tinyurl.com/7q8kbw Alaa __________________________________________________________________ Connect with friends from any web browser - no download required. Try the new Yahoo! Canada Messenger for the Web BETA at http://ca.messenger.yahoo.com/webmessengerpromo.php

1 0

Direct End USer Assignments, 2007-01 and Contractual Requirements
by Marcus.Gerdon 16 Jan '09

16 Jan '09

Hello @All, hopefully it's just an incapability of mine not to be able to get that topic into my head and understood... :-| ... because else I'd have to rant about this being accepted and implemented in a totally inconclusive and incomplete manner only useful for creating additional chaos. Not to take me wrong, in general I agree with putting in place some 'garbage collection' mechanism to return unused resources to the pool. What I was able to gather by digging through the archives, document store, google etc. was: 2007-01v4 has been accepted despite containing a bunch of topics left open. How's the 'sponsoring lir' defined ? Definition of fees left to NCC (what have been done by now, but I come back to that later). 'Contractual Requirements' left in some indefinite state (and without any discussion) as far as I can see. The charging scheme has been adapted to reflect End User - RIPE NCC contracts and fees. Did someone read that and compared LIR to End User ? The lowest fee - applicable for a single /24 already - equals to becoming a lir. What's the minimum allocation size today ? /21 ? Would you pay 1300 EUR p.a. to get a /24 when you can get a /21 by bcoming a lir for the same fees (which even provides much greater freedom, i.e. assignmnets allowed, partial transfer allowed) ? I think the only result of this will be PI/ASN fees turning into a mrket competition criteria. Anyone really going into the direct contract thing I expect to go for the /21-same-fee lir option. Won't this turn out to become an additional waste of addresses ? What about the 'sponsoring lir' theme ? The 'Contractual Requirements for Provider Independent Resource Holders in the RIPE NCC Service Region' is a nice document. But that's the meaning of it ? All I see is a *draft* document trying to lay hands on the bussiness relationship between lir and end user. Getting a few additional scoring points in the billing algorithm I don't even think about. The member fee and the difference between categories isn't that expensive. (Before someone complains, those having a problem with the fees by stepping up a category due to issuing a sufficient amount of PI/ASN imho have a problem with their business plan and calculations.) So, let's see: I tell my (potential) customers to sign a contract with RIPE and pay thousends of EUR per year whilst another LIR is 'sponsoring' the PI. Bad idea - my boss won't like me forcing customers to contract another isp instead. So, we'll go for 'sponsoring' mode and get the score. No problem so far. Now, what's that 'Contractual Requirements' thing ? Even accepting the process including automatic return of resources to RIPE, how is RIPE going to verify the future existence ? Why should I be forced to charge a fee ? Do 'I have to forward that fee to RIPE's bank account ? What about transfer of a PI or ASN? When the customer decides to cancell contracts PI and ASN have to be transferred to the new lir so I get rid of the score (and more important administrative issues). In the past any transfer was charged for with an non-ignorable amount. Unfortunately I didn't find the document which fee applies here. In case the 'Administrative fee' - which has been nullified - is applied, everything is good at least here. So, put together in a simple single question: How the f*** are PI/ASN handled today and under which constraints ? Hope anybody's able to enlighten me ... Thanks in advance, Marcus ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Systemtechnik Internet / Internet Engineering Versatel West GmbH Unterste-Wilms-Strasse 29 D-44143 Dortmund Fon: +49-(0)231-399-4486 | Fax: +49-(0)231-399-4491 marcus.gerdon(a)versatel.de | www.versatel.de Sitz der Gesellschaft: Essen, Registergericht: Essen HRB 19502 Geschäftsführer: Marc Lützenkirchen, Peer Knauer, Dr. Hai Cheng, Dr. Christian Schemann ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- AS8881 / AS8638 / AS13270 | MG3031-RIPE ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

2 1

Updated RIPE Documents
by Laura Cobley 15 Jan '09

15 Jan '09

[Apologies for duplicate e-mails] Dear Colleagues, We are pleased to announce the publication of two updated RIPE Documents, ripe-444, 'Autonomous System Number Request Form' and ripe-445, 'Supporting Notes for the Autonomous System Number Request Form'. The updated documents are available at: http://www.ripe.net/ripe/docs/asnrequestform.html http://www.ripe.net/ripe/docs/asnsupport.html These updates have been made to correct an administrative error. Best Regards, Laura Cobley Registration Services RIPE NCC

1 0