Dear colleagues, Thanks to all who shared their feedback on the policy documentation review. Below is a summary of the feedback we received. There was support for: -   Creating integrated policy documents. -   Aligning the IPv6 policy format with the IPv4 policy (ripe-826), including IXP and Root Server content as dedicated sections. General agreement to: -   Include only an Abstract, Introduction, and Policy Text in the main document. -   Reference Rationale and Acknowledgements in footnotes. -   Move Definitions and Goals to a shared annex or standalone reference. Mixed views on the process: -   Some prefer a RIPE NCC-led proposal. -   Others favour a community-led proposal, escalating to a Task Force if needed. Concerns and objections: -   Consolidating multiple documents into one might change the content of the policies. -   Separating the rationale from the policy document could change the semantic of the policy itself. -   Policies should be self-contained and definitions being in a separate document would not be ideal. Suggestions: -   Pinpoint the issues people have with the current documentation. -   Produce a supplementary guide to aid understanding without changing policy text. *** To address wishes and concerns, the RIPE NCC will work on making it easier for people to navigate RIPE policies and find policy documents without requiring the community’s time and effort in redrafting the current documents through the PDP. Updates will follow and additional feedback is of course welcome at anytime at pdo@ripe.net. Kind regards, Angela Dall’Ara Policy Officer RIPE NCC On 19/05/2025 15:01, Angela Dall'Ara wrote:

Dear colleagues,

Following up on the final point of my presentation [1] at RIPE 90, I would like to invite your feedback on the review of RIPE policy documentation.

Currently, we have multiple policy documents, and we often hear that it can be challenging to identify which document outlines the applicable policy for a specific request.

Additionally, the documents follow different formats, and not all of the content is directly relevant to understanding the core policies.

To address this, it may be beneficial to consolidate policies related to the same topic into a single, clear, and well-structured document.

More specifically we have:

Three policy documents regarding IPv6:

- ripe-738: IPv6 Address Allocation and Assignment Policy

(https://www.ripe.net/publications/docs/ripe-738/ <https://www.ripe.net/publications/docs/ripe-738/>) - ripe-451: IPv6 Address Space Policy For Internet Exchange Points

(https://www.ripe.net/publications/docs/ripe-451/ <https://www.ripe.net/publications/docs/ripe-451/>) - ripe-636: IPv6 Addresses for Internet Root Servers in the RIPE Region

(https://www.ripe.net/publications/docs/ripe-636/ <https://www.ripe.net/publications/docs/ripe-636/>)

Two policy documents regarding transfers: - ripe-807: RIPE Resource Transfer Policies

(https://www.ripe.net/publications/docs/ripe-807/ <https://www.ripe.net/publications/docs/ripe-807/>) - ripe-806: Voluntary Transfer Lock

(https://www.ripe.net/publications/docs/ripe-806/ <https://www.ripe.net/publications/docs/ripe-806/>)

Two policy documents regarding provider independent resource holders requirements: - ripe-637: Contractual Requirements for Provider Independent Resource Holders in the RIPE NCC Service Region

(https://www.ripe.net/publications/docs/ripe-637/ <https://www.ripe.net/publications/docs/ripe-637/>) - ripe-603: Publication of Sponsoring LIR for Independent Resources

(https://www.ripe.net/publications/docs/ripe-603/ <https://www.ripe.net/publications/docs/ripe-603/>)

In order to avoid generating too much traffic on the APWG ML, I kindly ask that you send your responses directly to me at pdo@ripe.net answering the following questions.

*Content structure *

In the new policy document:

A) Would including only the Abstract, Introduction and Policy Text from each existing document be enough? B) Could each document’s Rationale, Attribution and Acknowledgements be referenced via footnotes? C) Could the Definitions and Goals be published in a separate document?

*Preferred way forward*

Which approach would you prefer?

1) The RIPE community to set up a Task Force to redact new documents 2) The RIPE community to propose new documents for discussion through the PDP 3) The RIPE NCC to propose new documents for discussion through the PDP 4) Another approach (it could be that you are fine with leaving thing as they are, but if you have another idea, please explain)

Please share your thoughts by 31 May. I will compile and summarise the feedback received and share it with the WG.

Thank you in advance for your time and input.

Kind regards, Angela Dall’Ara

Policy Officer

RIPE NCC

[1] https://ripe90.ripe.net/archives/video/1611/(from 10:15 )