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

Re: [address-policy-wg] 2014-05 New Policy Proposal (Policy for Inter-RIR Transfers of Internet Resources)
by Jan Ingvoldstad 07 Jun '14

07 Jun '14

On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 3:13 PM, Marco Schmidt <mschmidt(a)ripe.net> wrote: > https://www.ripe.net/ripe/policies/proposals/2014-05 I like this proposed policy, it is very reasonable, and seems to have addressed the overlying concerns with inter-RIR transfers. I have a comment regarding the second argument against the policy, "*The proposal will re-introduce operational needs justification, if any RIR insists on this, in order to effect certain transfers*." I don't think this is an argument against the policy itself, but it is a concern that RIPE NCC needs to address when guiding LIRs in the transfer process. In other words: yes, operational needs justification under any other RIR's "jurisdiction" is a concern, but it is not within RIPE's powers to do anything about it, other than help RIPE's LIRs make the best of it when transferring resources. -- Jan

6 9

Re: [address-policy-wg] 2014-05 New Policy Proposal (Policy for Inter-RIR Transfers of Internet Resources)
by Nigel Titley 07 Jun '14

07 Jun '14

On 03/06/14 14:13, Marco Schmidt wrote: > Dear colleagues, > > > A new RIPE Policy Proposal has been made and is now available for > discussion. > > You can find the full proposal at: > > https://www.ripe.net/ripe/policies/proposals/2014-05 > > > We encourage you to review this proposal and send your comments to > <address-policy-wg(a)ripe.net> before 2 July 2014. > > Speaking as myself and myself only. Much as I disliked the woolly language of its predecessor I think this version is crisp and clean. Once the already mentioned nits about LIR/Member/Organisation/Stonecutter are sorted out, and with a possible fix to 2014-01, as mentioned by Carsten, I think this would be a good addition to RIPE region policy. Nigel

1 0

Re: [address-policy-wg] 2014-05 New Policy Proposal (Policy for Inter-RIR Transfers of Internet Resources)
by sandrabrown＠ipv4marketgroup.com 06 Jun '14

06 Jun '14

On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 2:25 PM, Jan Ingvoldstad <frettled(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 7:30 PM, Scott Leibrand <scottleibrand(a)gmail.com> > wrote: > >> Overall, this policy looks good to me. However, I believe there is one >> problem with the text. The language regarding recipients in other regions >> requires that the recipient be an LIR. However, the transfer policies of >> the other regions do not make any such distinction. Therefore, I believe it >> would be more appropriate to use the word organization instead of LIR when >> referring to recipients in other regions. >> > > That's a fair point. > > -When Internet number resources are transferred to another RIR, the RIPE > NCC will work with the destination RIR to allow the transfer to the > receiving LIR. > +When Internet number resources are transferred to another RIR, the RIPE > NCC will work with the destination RIR to allow the transfer to the > receiving organization. > > Like that? > Yes. ________________________ I am in agreement with Scott and Jan on this revision..."LIR" becomes "receiving organization". Thank you to you both. - Sandra Also: -Address space may only be re-allocated to another LIR that is a member of an RIR that allows transfers. The block that is to be re-allocated must not be smaller than the minimum allocation block size at the time of re-allocation. +Address space may only be re-allocated to another organization that is a member of an RIR that allows transfers. The block that is to be re-allocated must not be smaller than the minimum allocation block size at the time of re-allocation. However, that may have implications for intra-RIR transfers, so you might need to separate out the two cases if you don't want to imply that non-LIR organizations can receive transfers in the RIPE region. Maybe something like "to another LIR in the RIPE region, or an organization that is a member of an RIR that allows transfers." -Scott _______________ Replacing "LIR" with "organization" should also be ok within the context of RIPE Transfer Policy. - Sandra _________________

1 0

Re: [address-policy-wg] [sig-policy] RIPE Policy Text for Inter-RIR Transfers - 2014-05
by Sander Steffann 05 Jun '14

05 Jun '14

Hi John, Op 5 jun. 2014, om 16:54 heeft John Curran <jcurran(a)arin.net> het volgende geschreven: > On Jun 5, 2014, at 7:24 AM, Skeeve Stevens <skeeve(a)eintellegonetworks.com> wrote: > >> Here is the policy text being proposed in RIPE for Inter-RIR Transfers - 2014-05 >> >> https://www.ripe.net/ripe/policies/proposals/2014-05 I think this policy should be discussed on the RIPE address policy mailing list. Feedback in other places does not have much effect ;) CC'ing APWG now. > From the proposed policy text (with labels added for reference) - > > (a) > When Internet number resources are transferred to another RIR, the RIPE NCC will work with the destination RIR to allow the transfer to the receiving LIR. > > (b) > When Internet number resources are transferred from another RIR, the RIPE NCC will work with its member LIR to fulfil any requirements of the sending RIR. > > (c) > If resources are transferred as legacy resources, the RIPE NCC will apply the legacy policy when accepting these resources. > > The intent of the above text may not be clear with respect to resources coming from > another region (b) which are presently "legacy" resources in that region, i.e. it might > be possible to reasonable argue that the policy intent is (b) or (c) for that case. When receiving resources from another region then (b) will always apply. At a minimum the RIRs have to work together to keep the databases consistent. If the originating RIR tells the RIPE NCC that those resources are legacy resources then the receiver can choose to have them treated as legacy resources in the RIPE region as well. But the policy does not allow conversion in the other direction. If ARIN would tell the RIPE NCC that the resources are *not* legacy resources (not ever, or not anymore) then they can not not be treated as legacy after transfer. > (Not a comment in favor or opposition to the proposed policy; just seeking clarity so > that implementation, if it were adopted, has solid alignment with the policy intent.) Thanks. Please continue the discussion on the RIPE APWG list ;) Cheers! Sander

1 0

2012-02 Policy Proposal Withdrawn (Policy for Inter-RIR transfers of IPv4 address space)
by Marco Schmidt 03 Jun '14

03 Jun '14

Dear colleagues, The proposal 2012-02, "Policy for Inter-RIR transfers of IPv4 address space" has been withdrawn. It is now archived and can be found at: https://www.ripe.net/ripe/policies/proposals/2012-02 Reason for withdrawal: The proposer of 2012-02 proposed 2014-05, a new inter-RIR transfer policy. 2014-05 focuses on being aligned with internal resource transfers as well as being more cohesive with the policies of other RIRs. As a consequence, the proposer decided to withdraw 2012-02. Regards, Marco Schmidt Policy Development Officer RIPE NCC

1 0

2014-05 New Policy Proposal (Policy for Inter-RIR Transfers of Internet Resources)
by Marco Schmidt 03 Jun '14

03 Jun '14

Dear colleagues, A new RIPE Policy Proposal has been made and is now available for discussion. You can find the full proposal at: https://www.ripe.net/ripe/policies/proposals/2014-05 We encourage you to review this proposal and send your comments to <address-policy-wg(a)ripe.net> before 2 July 2014. Regards Marco Schmidt Policy Development Officer RIPE NCC

1 0

2014-03 Draft Document and Impact Analysis will be produced (Remove Multihoming Requirement for AS Number Assignments)
by Marco Schmidt 02 Jun '14

02 Jun '14

Dear colleagues, The discussion period for the proposal described in 2014-03, "Remove Multihoming Requirement for AS Number Assignments" has ended. A draft document and the RIPE NCC Impact Analysis will now be prepared for review. We will publish the documents shortly and we will make an announcement. You can find the full proposal at: https://www.ripe.net/ripe/policies/proposals/2014-03 Regards Marco Schmidt Policy Development Officer RIPE NCC

1 0

2014-02 Draft Document and Impact Analysis will be produced (Allow IPv4 PI transfer)
by Marco Schmidt 30 May '14

30 May '14

Dear colleagues, The discussion period for the proposal described in 2014-02, "Allow IPv4 PI transfer" has ended. A draft document and the RIPE NCC Impact Analysis will now be prepared for review. We will publish the documents shortly and we will make an announcement. You can find the full proposal at: http://www.ripe.net/ripe/policies/proposals/2014-02 Regards, Marco Schmidt Policy Development Officer RIPE NCC

1 0

Special Issue on "Underwater Sensor Networks" in (JSAN)
by Sandra Sendra 28 May '14

28 May '14

=================================================== Journal of Sensor and Actuator Networks (JSAN) Special Issue "Underwater Sensor Networks" http://www.mdpi.com/journal/jsan/special_issues/usn Deadline for manuscript submissions: 30 September 2014 ---------------------------------------------------- === SPECIAL ISSUE === New advances in information technologies, circuits, systems and communication protocols have made possible the deployment of underwater sensor networks. These issues have lead researchers to propose new underwater sensor nodes, sensor node placement, protocols for their communication, architectures, and study new ways to communicate with higher bandwidth at higher distances. Moreover, the range of underwater applications is growing fast because of the last research in oceanography, marine science and aquiculture, so there is a need of underwater sensor networks in order to support these disciplines. This special Issue is tries to collect unpublished works on theory and practice on underwater sensor networks, with special interest on real implementations and deployments. We also seek new proposals on wireless communication technologies. === KEYWORDS === The Special Issue "Underwater Sensor Networks" topics include (but are not limited to) the following: - Underwater sensor nodes - Underwater sensor node placement - Routing protocols for underwater sensor networks - Underwater communications - Underwater architectures - Underwater wireless communications - Underwater sensor network deployments === SUBMISSION === Manuscripts should be submitted online at www.mdpi.com by registering and logging in to this website. Once you are registered, click here to go to the submission form (http://www.mdpi.com/user/manuscripts/upload/?journal=jsan). Manuscripts can be submitted until the deadline. Papers will be published continuously (as soon as accepted) and will be listed together on the special issue website. Research articles, review articles as well as communications are invited. For planned papers, a title and short abstract (about 100 words) can be sent to the Editorial Office for announcement on this website. Submitted manuscripts should not have been published previously, nor be under consideration for publication elsewhere (except conference proceedings papers). All manuscripts are refereed through a peer-review process. A guide for authors and other relevant information for submission of manuscripts is available on the Instructions for Authors page. Journal of Sensor and Actuator Networks is an international peer-reviewed Open Access quarterly journal published by MDPI. Please visit the Instructions for Authors page (http://www.mdpi.com/journal/jsan/instructions) before submitting a manuscript. For the first couple of issues the Article Processing Charge (APC) will be waived for well-prepared manuscripts. English correction and/or formatting fees of 250 CHF (Swiss Francs) will be charged in certain cases for those articles accepted for publication that require extensive additional formatting and/or English corrections. === SPECIAL ISSUE EDITORS === Guest Editors Prof. Dr. Jaime Lloret Mauri (jlloret(a)dcom.upv.es) Integrated Management Coastal Research Institute, Polytechnic University of Valencia, Camino de Vera 46022, Valencia, Spain Dr. Sandra Sendra (sansenco(a)posgrado.upv.es) Integrated Management Coastal Research Institute, Polytechnic University of Valencia, Camino de Vera 46022, Valencia, Spain ===================================================

1 0

Re: [address-policy-wg] 2014-02 Discussion Period extended until 23 May 2014 (Allow IPv4 PI transfer)
by Erik Bais 21 May '14

21 May '14

Hi I want to point out that the discussion period of this policy proposal ( 2014-02 Allow IPv4 PI Transfer) will end in a couple days. https://www.ripe.net/ripe/policies/proposals/2014-02 During the RIPE68 AP-WG session I provided a presentation based on the feedback on this list and the policy. https://ripe68.ripe.net/archives/video/167/ The webcast and presentation can be found on the link above for those that missed it. If there are specific questions on the way of the proposal is written or if there are questions about the proposal, please respond here on the list. And also if you agree with the proposal, do state your support here on the list. Kind regards, Erik Bais Author of 2014-02

2 1