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

2011-01 Review Period extended until 25 August 2011 (Global Policy for post exhaustion IPv4 mechanisms by the IANA)
by Emilio Madaio 31 Aug '11

31 Aug '11

Dear Colleagues, The Review Period for the proposal 2011-01 has been extended until 25 August 2011. You can find the full proposal at: http://www.ripe.net/ripe/policies/proposals/2011-01 We encourage you to review this policy proposal and send your comments to <address-policy-wg(a)ripe.net>. Regards, Emilio Madaio Policy Development Officer RIPE NCC

13 14

2010-01 Proposal Accepted (Temporary Internet Number Assignment Policies)
by Emilio Madaio 12 Aug '11

12 Aug '11

Dear Colleagues, Consensus has been reached, and the proposal described in 2010-01 has been accepted by the RIPE community. The new policy "Temporary Internet Number Assignment Policies" is available at: https://www.ripe.net/ripe/docs/ripe-526 The updated policies "IPv6 Address Allocation and Assignment Policy", "IPv4 Address Allocation and Assignment Policies for the RIPE NCC Service Region" and "Autonomous System (AS) Number Assignment Policies" are available respectively at: https://www.ripe.net/ripe/docs/ripe-523 https://www.ripe.net/ripe/docs/ripe-524 https://www.ripe.net/ripe/docs/ripe-525 You can find the full proposal at: http://www.ripe.net/ripe/policies/proposals/2010-01 Thank you for your input. Regards Emilio Madaio Policy Development Officer RIPE NCC

1 0

2011-03 Last Call for Comments (Post-depletion IPv4 address recycling)
by Emilio Madaio 11 Aug '11

11 Aug '11

Dear Colleagues, The proposal described in 2011-03 is now at its Concluding Phase. You can find the full proposal at: http://www.ripe.net/ripe/policies/proposals/2011-03 Please e-mail any final comments about this proposal to address-policy-wg(a)ripe.net before 8 September 2011. Regards Emilio Madaio Policy Development Officer RIPE NCC

1 0

2011-03 New Draft Document Published (Post-depletion IPv4 address recycling)
by Emilio Madaio 11 Aug '11

11 Aug '11

Dear Colleagues, The draft document for the proposal described in 2011-03 has been published. The Impact Analysis that was conducted for this proposal has also been published. You can find the full proposal and Impact Analysis at: http://www.ripe.net/ripe/policies/proposals/2011-03 and the draft document at: http://www.ripe.net/ripe/policies/proposals/2011-03/draft We encourage you to read the draft document text and send any comments to address-policy-wg(a)ripe.net before 10 August 2011. Regards Emilio Madaio Policy Development Officer RIPE NCC

6 5

2011-02 Review Period extended until 23 August 2011 (Removal of multihomed requirement for IPv6 PI)
by Emilio Madaio 09 Aug '11

09 Aug '11

Dear Colleagues, The Review Period for the proposed change to RIPE Document has been extended until 23 August 2011. You can find the full proposal at: https://www.ripe.net/ripe/policies/proposals/2011-02 We encourage you to review this policy proposal and send your comments to <address-policy-wg(a)ripe.net>. Regards, Emilio Madaio Policy Development Officer RIPE NCC

1 0

Discussion standards
by Sander Steffann 08 Aug '11

08 Aug '11

Hello working group, Declaration of hats: speaking on behalf of the chairs of this working group: Gert Döring and myself. We have noticed that in the last months a lot of messages about policy proposals contain assumptions, feelings and expectations. While these can be very important in a discussion it is very hard to discuss such statements. Too much of this and it can make policy development nearly impossible. If we want to make good decisions and work towards consensus we need to raise our standards a bit. I want to ask everybody here to add supporting facts, numbers, statistics or other data wherever possible. That doesn't mean that nobody should express their doubts or opinions! All input is still welcome. But please be aware that when trying to judge if consensus has been reached we might give less weight to input that has no data backing it. Thank you, Sander Steffann APWG Co-chair

1 0

2006-05 Last Call for Comments (PI Assignment Size)
by Emilio Madaio 08 Aug '11

08 Aug '11

Dear Colleagues, The proposal described in 2006-05 is now at its Concluding Phase. You can find the full proposal at: http://www.ripe.net/ripe/policies/proposals/2006-05 Please e-mail any final comments about this proposal to address-policy-wg(a)ripe.net before 5 September 2011. Regards Emilio Madaio Policy Development Officer RIPE NCC

1 0

Re: [address-policy-wg] the post-mortem on 2008-08
by Milton L Mueller 28 Jul '11

28 Jul '11

Jim: > -----Original Message----- > We're in a paradox where the > community has killed a policy on address certification while > simultaneously authorising the NCC to develop such a system. [snip] > There now needs to be a vote by the NCC membership to > take a decision which will normalise that situation. And unlike RIPE's > PDP, the AGM shouldn't take 3 years to decide. If the NCC membership votes to continue developing the system, how exactly does the situation get "normalized?" A vote to continue development of a system that has been rejected in the policy process continues the paradox, does it not? Only a negative vote would normalize. And I don't get the impression that you would vote no, or urge others to vote no. Milton L. Mueller Professor, Syracuse University School of Information Studies Internet Governance Project http://blog.internetgovernance.org

2 1

Re: 2006-05 New Draft Document Published (PI Assignment Size)
by Josh Nertrino 24 Jul '11

24 Jul '11

I fully support this proposal. Finally some movement..... (this draft was submitted back in 2006!) Ps. ARIN already has this for years !!!

1 0

RE: [ipv6-wg] additional IPv6 allocation (ripe-512 issues)
by Ivan Pepelnjak 22 Jul '11

22 Jul '11

Let me try to understand: (A) We don't disagree that he might actually deserve more than /32 (B) According to my understanding of previous discussions I had on this topic, RIPE might actually have already reserved extra space for his future needs (C) According to the current rules he can't get another /32 for a total of /31 without using most of the current /32 (and hoping his next /32 will be adjacent) (D) Someone is seriously suggesting he returns the current /32 and asks for a brand new /31 which he will likely get. Was someone reading too much Kafka or The Good Soldier Švejk lately? Ivan > -----Original Message----- > From: Jan Zorz @ Go6.si [mailto:jan@go6.si] > Sent: Monday, July 18, 2011 5:13 PM > To: Ivan Pepelnjak; 'Sander Steffann'; 'Yannis Nikolopoulos' > Subject: RE: [ipv6-wg] additional IPv6 allocation (ripe-512 issues) > > Going to production it was said :) > > I did a long discussion with Alex Le Heux (RIPE IPRA) about the same > issue, his advice was that. > > Jan > > Ivan Pepelnjak <ipepelnjak(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > >Extremely helpful advice from the ops perspective. > > > >> Trade in your /32 and get something bigger under initial alloc > >> conditions... :) > > -- > Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.

20 44