RIPE Policy Proposals

Anyone in the RIPE (Réseaux IP Européens) community can suggest a new policy or a change to an existing policy. You do not have to be a member of the RIPE NCC.

RIPE is a collaborative forum open to anyone who is interested in wide area IP networks. There are no membership requirements for participation in RIPE. Its activities are performed on a voluntary basis and decisions are made by consensus.

The RIPE NCC provides administrative support for RIPE. One of the jobs that the RIPE NCC does is to look after the Policy Development Process. The RIPE NCC manages the process, but all input comes from the RIPE community. The RIPE NCC does not make policies, however it is responsible for making sure that they are applied in its service region.

A glossary of terms explains the phrases used in the table below.

Name	Number	Submission Date	Current Phase	Phase Ends/Ended	Latest Status	Working Group
PI Assignment Size	2006-05	29 August 2006	Review	14 March 2007	Awaiting Decision from WG Chairs	Address Policy
Summary: This proposal suggests to have the minimum assignment size for PI assignments to be a /24 when routing is a major issue for a multihoming End User.
Using the Resource Public Key Infrastructure to Construct Validated IRR Data	2008-04	29 April 2008	Discussion	27 May 2008	Awaiting Decision from Proposers	Routing
Summary: This is a proposal to introduce a new registry that augments IRR data with the formally verifiable trust model of the Resource Public Key Infrastructure (RPKI) and provide ISPs with the tools to generate an overlay to the IRR which is much more strongly trustable.
Use of Final /8	2008-06	15 October 2008	Discussion	12 November 2008	Awaiting Decision from Proposer	Address Policy
Summary: This proposal describes how RIPE NCC should make allocations from its last /8 worth of address space at the time of total depletion of the IANA free pool.
Ensuring Efficient Use of Historical IPv4 Resources	2008-07	15 October 2008	Discussion	24 August 2009	Awaiting Decision from Proposer	Address Policy
Summary: This is a proposal to require documentation of all address resources held when assessing a RIPE NCC member's eligibility for further IPv4 address space.
Initial Certification Policy for Provider Aggregatable Address Space Holders	2008-08	16 October 2008	Discussion	13 November 2008	Awaiting Decision from Proposer	Address Policy
Summary: The RIPE NCC plans to deploy a certification service that can be used to secure uniqueness of resources. This proposal lays out guidelines for how LIRs can receive certificates over their Provider Aggregatable (PA) address space holdings and how these certificates should be maintained.
Global Policy for the allocation of IPv4 blocks to Regional Internet Registries	2009-01	19 February 2009	Discussion	19 March 2009	Awaiting Decision from Proposer	Address Policy
Summary: With the depletion of the IANA free pool of IPv4 address space, the current policy regarding the allocation of IPv4 address space to the RIRs will become moot. The RIRs may, according to their individual policies and procedures, recover IPv4 address space. This policy provides a mechanism for the RIRs to retro allocate the recovered IPv4 address space to the IANA and provides the IANA the policy by which it can allocate it back to the RIRs on a needs basis. This policy creates a new global pool of IPv4 address space that can be allocated where it is needed on a global basis without a transfer of address space between the RIRs.
IPv4 Allocation and Assignments to Facilitate IPv6 Deployment	2009-04	7 April 2009	Discussion	5 May 2009	Awaiting Decision from Proposer	Address Policy
Summary: The last IPv4 /8 that the RIPE NCC will hold is proposed to be dedicated to facilitate deployment of IPv6. Allocations and assignments from this block will be made based on demonstrated need, but the size will be downscaled taking into account existing transition technologies (for example dual-stack lite, NAT464, successors of NAT-PT). The proposed minimum allocation size is to be a /27 for such allocations and assignments. Allocations and assignments from this block will also be justified by demonstrating that the requirements of the transition plan as specified in RFC5211 are met.