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

WG Chair selection
by Paul Hoogsteder 06 May '18

06 May '18

Hello AP-WG, I don't think I've seen any support for either candidate for the position of WG chair on the list yet. I think Erik Bais is more than qualified for such a position, he's been active in the RIPE community and this working group for years and has made many valuable contributions. +many for Erik! Best regards, Paul Hoogsteder Meanie AS31019 Breedband Delft AS34108

13 12

inputs on possible policy proposal for IPv6
by JORDI PALET MARTINEZ 04 May '18

04 May '18

Hi all, As you probably know, ARIN amended some time ago their IPv6 policy proposal in order to make sure that the allocations to LIRs are aligned to the nibble boundary. In the context of another discussion in AfriNIC, Owen DeLong, suggested that we could do something similar. I'm considering submitting a policy proposal in each RIR (RIPE, AfriNIC, LACNIC, APNIC), for that, but I will like to get some inputs before, and "sense" the feeling about that of the participants. Note that in the case of RIPE, we have a big difference with the other RIRs, because all them start with /32, while we updated our policy several years ago (because 6rd deployment), to allocated /29. This means that if we go for this policy, it will be justified to "upgrade" all the /29 allocations to a /28. This is the example that Owen sent to the AfriNIC list: 1. Figure out the number of end sites you expect to serve in your largest aggregation point in 3-5 years. 2. Round that to a nibble boundary (with a 25% minimum free space) (1-12 end sites = 4 bits, 13-192 end sites = 8 bits. 193-3,072 end sites = 12 bits, 3,073-49,152 end sites = 16 bits, 49,153-786,432 = 20 bits, etc.)… Call this E. 3. Figure out the number of aggregation points you expect to have in 3-5 years. Round that up to a nibble boundary with a 25% minimum free space (same as in step 2). Call this A. 4. 48-(A+E) = prefix size. Example: An ISP has 42,000 customers in it’s largest end site. It has 128 end sites. E = 16, A = 8, 48-(16+8) = 48-(24) = 24, this ISP should get a /24. So, would you agree in doing something on this line? Thanks in advance for any inputs! Regards, Jordi ********************************************** IPv4 is over Are you ready for the new Internet ? http://www.consulintel.es The IPv6 Company This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or confidential. The information is intended to be for the exclusive use of the individual(s) named above and further non-explicilty authorized disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited and will be considered a criminal offense. If you are not the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited, will be considered a criminal offense, so you must reply to the original sender to inform about this communication and delete it.

4 6

2018-03 New Policy Proposal (Fixing Outdated Information in the IPv4 Policy)
by Marco Schmidt 26 Apr '18

26 Apr '18

Dear colleagues, A new RIPE Policy proposal, 2018-03, "Fixing Outdated Information in the IPv4 Policy" is now available for discussion. This proposal aims to fix outdated information in the RIPE Policy "IPv4 Address Allocation and Assignment Policies for the RIPE NCC Service Region". You can find the full proposal at: https://www.ripe.net/participate/policies/proposals/2018-03 As per the RIPE Policy Development Process (PDP), the purpose of this four week Discussion Phase is to discuss the proposal and provide feedback to the proposer. At the end of the Discussion Phase, the proposer, with the agreement of the WG Chairs, will decide how to proceed with the proposal. We encourage you to review this proposal and send your comments to <address-policy-wg(a)ripe.net> before 23 May 2018. Regards, Marco Schmidt Policy Officer RIPE NCC Sent via RIPE Forum -- https://www.ripe.net/participate/mail/forum

4 3

2018-04 New Proposal (PDP Clarification) to be discussed on RIPE Discussion Mailing List
by Marco Schmidt 26 Apr '18

26 Apr '18

Dear colleagues, A new RIPE proposal, 2018-04, "PDP Clarification" has been published on the RIPE Discussion mailing list for discussion. This proposal aims to clarify the options available to the WG chairs at the end of the Review Phase of the RIPE Policy Development Process (PDP). Please note that since changes to the PDP can affect all RIPE Working Groups, the RIPE Chair decided to discuss this proposal on the RIPE Discussion mailing list. The RIPE Chair will also moderate the proposal discussion. We wanted to notify the Address Policy Working Group in particular, as most of the policy proposals are discussed here. You can find the full proposal at: https://www.ripe.net/participate/policies/proposals/2018-04 We encourage you to review this proposal and join the discussion on the RIPE Discussion mailing list (ripe-list(a)ripe.net) Regards, Marco Schmidt Policy Officer RIPE NCC Sent via RIPE Forum -- https://www.ripe.net/participate/mail/forum

1 0

Agenda for APWG at RIPE 76 in Marseille
by Sander Steffann 18 Apr '18

18 Apr '18

Hi APWG folks, below you can find a draft for the RIPE address policy WG meeting's agenda, which will take place in Marseille in the following time slots: Wednesday, May 16, 09:00 - 10:30 Wednesday, May 16, 11:00 - 12:30 If you have anything else you want to see on the agenda, or if we need to change anything, please let us know. Regards, Gert Döring & Sander Steffann, APWG chairs ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Wednesday, 09:00-10:30 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- A. Administrative Matters (welcome, thanking the scribe, approving the minutes, etc.) B. WG Chair Selection - longest-serving chair (Sander Steffann) stepping down - Sander is not volunteering for another term, so we'll select a new co-chair C. The role and function of the ASO within ICANN Public consultation, Axel Pawlik D. Current Policy Topics - Marco Schmidt, NCC PDO - global policy overview "what's going on?" - common policy topics in all regions (end of IPv4, transfers, ...) - overview over concluded proposals in the RIPE region since RIPE 75 - brief overview of new proposals (if any) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Wednesday, 12:00-13:30 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Welcome back E. Feedback From NCC Registration Service - Andrea Cima (+ discussion with the group) F. Discussion of open policy proposals 2018-01 Organisation-LIR Clarification in IPv6 Policy Jordi Palet Martinez / Erik Bais / Juri Bogdanov 2018-02 "Assignment Clarification in IPv6 Policy" Jordi Palet Martinez / Erik Bais 2018-03 Fixing Outdated Information in the IPv4 Policy Andrea Cima Y. Open Policy Hour The Open Policy Hour is a showcase for your policy ideas. If you have a policy proposal you'd like to debut, prior to formally submitting it, here is your opportunity. Z. AOB

2 3

2018-02 New Policy Proposal (Assignment Clarification in IPv6 Policy)
by Marco Schmidt 18 Apr '18

18 Apr '18

Dear colleagues, A new RIPE Policy proposal, 2018-02, "Assignment Clarification in IPv6 Policy" is now available for discussion. This proposal aims to clarify the definition of “Assign” in ripe-699 (section 2.6). The non-permanent provision of up to a /64 prefix to third parties shall not be considered a sub-assignment. You can find the full proposal at: https://www.ripe.net/participate/policies/proposals/2018-02 As per the RIPE Policy Development Process (PDP), the purpose of this four week Discussion Phase is to discuss the proposal and provide feedback to the proposer. At the end of the Discussion Phase, the proposer, with the agreement of the WG Chairs, will decide how to proceed with the proposal. We encourage you to review this proposal and send your comments to <address-policy-wg(a)ripe.net> before 15 May 2018. Regards, Marco Schmidt Policy Officer RIPE NCC Sent via RIPE Forum -- https://www.ripe.net/participate/mail/forum

5 8

Proposal Implemented: 2016-04, "IPv6 Sub-assignment Clarification"
by Marco Schmidt 16 Apr '18

16 Apr '18

Dear colleagues, We are pleased to announce that we have implemented the policy proposal 2016-04, "IPv6 Sub-assignment Clarification". The policy change re-defined the term "sub-assignment" for IPv6. The provision of separate addresses (/128) to customers of the assignment holder will not be considered a sub-assignment. More information, especially for IPv6 PI assignments, can be found at: https://www.ripe.net/manage-ips-and-asns/ipv6/request-ipv6/ipv6 The archived policy proposal can be found at: https://www.ripe.net/participate/policies/proposals/2016-04 The RIPE Document, "IPv6 Address Allocation and Assignment Policy", is available at: https://www.ripe.net/publications/docs/ripe-699 Kind regards, Marco Schmidt Policy Officer RIPE NCC Sent via RIPE Forum -- https://www.ripe.net/participate/mail/forum

1 0

RIPE 75 Address Policy WG Draft Minutes
by Marco Schmidt 12 Apr '18

12 Apr '18

Dear colleagues, The draft minutes from the Address Policy Working Group sessions at RIPE 75 have now been published: https://www.ripe.net/participate/ripe/wg/ap/minutes/ripe-75-address-policy-… Please let us know of any corrections or amendments. Kind regards, Marco Schmidt Policy Officer RIPE NCC Sent via RIPE Forum -- https://www.ripe.net/participate/mail/forum

1 0

Preliminary policy proposal: Exceptional /20 IPv4 allocations from the last /8
by Janos Zsako 02 Apr '18

02 Apr '18

Dear all, Several existing and potential LIRs have complained about the fact that a /22 may not be enough for starting an Internet service. While there is a general agreement that this allocation size should not be changed during the last /8 policy, it may be useful to make some exceptions in some properly justified cases. There is also a general agreement that people should take care of their health, they should eat healthy food and do sufficient physical exercise, possibly by going regularly to the gym. I have thought of a possibility to allocate up to a /20 from the last /8 pool to the companies that can prove that they encourage and help their employees to take care of their help, and that the employees themselves do take advantage of these possibilities. I already have a couple of initial suggestions for consideration, like the average number of hours of workout per employee per week, the average Body Mass Index (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Body_mass_index) per employee, and a couple of similar good ways of measuring the health status at the company. I also though that computing a simple average may disadvantage larger companies, therefore some formula taking into account the size of the different departments and the values measured there could be worked out, similar to the HD ratio used in determining the address utilisation (https://www.ripe.net/publications/docs/ripe-699#hd_ratio) This could make the proposal more fair to large enterprises. There is, however, quite some work to be done to make these ideas properly implementable. I think we should set up a small task force to determine the criteria such LIRs should meet. The time is pressing, we have to act quickly in order to be able to discuss the proposal in Marseilles. Anyone who volunteers for the Task Force should contact me ASAP. We can then come up with a formal proposal and present it to the working group, by following the formal steps of the PDP. I am looking forward to being contacted by the volunteers. Best regards, Janos PS: I am sure some people, when they hear about a new policy proposal for IPv4, they will come up with the usual argument that this is like arranging the deck chairs again. I have to mention, however, that the latest scientific research proved that the sinking of the Titanic could have been delayed by several hours if the deck chairs were properly arranged in due time. Therefore, this proposal may also contribute to a better Internet on the long run. PS2: To those who had the patience to read this e-mail I wish a Happy 1 April!

5 4

LACNIC "Proposal to create a Global Internet Registry (GIR)"
by Marco Schmidt 26 Mar '18

26 Mar '18

Dear colleagues, We would like to make you aware of a policy proposal that is being discussed in the LACNIC community, called "Proposal to create a Global Internet Registry (GIR)". You can find the proposal here: https://politicas.lacnic.net/politicas/detail/id/LAC-2018-1?language=en This is a global policy proposal, meaning that it would apply to all five RIRs. However, each RIR community would first need to ratify an identical version of the policy before it could be implemented. No such policy proposal has yet been submitted in our service region. We will let you know of any further developments. You can find more on the global policy development process here: https://www.nro.net/policies/global-policies-development-process/ Kind regards Marco Schmidt Policy Development Officer RIPE NCC Sent via RIPE Forum -- https://www.ripe.net/participate/mail/forum

12 17