Hi Martin, On Tue, Mar 29, 2022 at 11:50 AM Martin Stanislav <ms@uakom.sk> wrote:
Hi James,
On Tue, Mar 29, 2022 at 08:59:44AM +0200, James Kennedy wrote:
2.1. The task force recommends that as resource holders have full responsibility over the registration of their IPv4 PA assignment(s), they are free to make assignments or not. If the community accepts this recommendation, the relevant RIPE Policies should be updated accordingly, and documenting IPv4 PA assignment(s) will stop being a policy requirement.
Is this line of thought that a responsibility over the registration of an aggregate IP resource implies optional documenting of a resouce subset explained somewhere? Was utilization of an aggregate resource the only reason to document details?
Explanation and analysis from the TF on that recommendation can be found in the archives of APWG RIPE meeting sessions: - RIPE83, agenda item F: https://ripe83.ripe.net/programme/meeting-plan/ap-wg/ - RIPE83, agenda item G: https://ripe82.ripe.net/programme/meeting-plan/ap-wg/ In the interest of being productive and moving forward with the recommendations to the next phase, we would now like to focus on getting interested volunteers to work on developing policy proposals via the PDP (Policy Development Process). There will be ample opportunity for the community to revisit and discuss any detail once again during the PDP: https://www.ripe.net/participate/policies https://www.ripe.net/publications/docs/ripe-710 Regards, James APWG co-chair