Hi all, I still very much support this proposal which will boost viability of IPv6 deployment in a lot of places, especially in smaller companies that aren't LIR. Thanks Max On 24 March, 2026 00:24 CET, Steinar Skjelanger <steinar@skjelanger.com> wrote: Dear all, I would like to voice my support for the proposal. We are currently assigned a single /48, but would qualify for a /40 with the new policy, and are eagerly awaiting the adoption of it. Kind regards, Steinar Skjelanger Norwegian Institute of Marine Research On Mon, Mar 23, 2026 at 7:02 PM Franziska Lichtblau (rhalina) <rhalina@old-forest.org> wrote: Dear Address Policy WG, The Discussion Phase for Version 2 of policy proposal 2024-01 ended on 28 November 2025. The feedback received during this phase was limited. We have discussed the situation with Tobias, who has confirmed the intention to continue with the proposal. As per the RIPE Policy Development Process (PDP), at the end of the Discussion Phase the proposer, with the agreement of the WG Chairs, decides whether the proposal will move to the next phase or be withdrawn. The WG Chairs and the proposer have agreed to proceed. If you have not yet shared your view on this proposal, we encourage you to do so now. The limited feedback during the Discussion Phase on v2 of 2024.01 means that the community's feedback is particularly valuable right now. Even a brief statement of support, opposition, or neutrality helps us as WG Chairs assess the situation. You can find the proposal at: https://www.ripe.net/community/policies/proposals/2024-01/2/ Kind regards, Alex, Franziska, Leo Address Policy Working Group Chairs ----- To unsubscribe from this mailing list or change your subscription options, please visit: https://mailman.ripe.net/mailman3/lists/address-policy-wg.ripe.net/ As we have migrated to Mailman 3, you will need to create an account with the email matching your subscription before you can change your settings. More details at: https://www.ripe.net/membership/mail/mailman-3-migration/