You are here: Home > Participate > Policy Development > Archived Policy Proposals

Archived Policy Proposals

The policy proposals on this page have been archived. You can see at a glance if they were accepted and adopted by the RIPE community or withdrawn at any stage.

Name Status Proposal Number Working Group Date Archived
Publish statistics on Intra-RIR Legacy updates
WITHDRAWN
2017-01 Address Policy Working Group September 2017

This proposal aimed to to add the requirement that the RIPE NCC publish all changes to the holdership of legacy resources in the existing transfer statistics.


Reason for Withdrawal: The proposer didn't see enough community support, especially from Legacy Resource Holders as the parties that would be most affected.

Synchronising the Initial and Subsequent IPv6 Allocation Policies
ACCEPTED
2016-05 Address Policy Working Group March 2017

Summary: This policy change matches the subsequent IPv6 allocation requirements with the initial allocation requirements.

RIPE Resource Transfer Policies
ACCEPTED
2015-04 Address Policy Working Group March 2017

Summary: This proposal creates a single policy document for Internet number resource transfers, replacing text in several RIPE Policies. It also introduces a 24-month holding period for IPv4 addresses and 16-bit ASNs after any change of holdership.

Locking Down the Final /8 Policy
WITHDRAWN
2016-03 Address Policy Working Group November 2016

Summary: This proposal aimed to ban transfers of allocations made under the final /8 policy.

Reason for Withdrawal: The proposer decided to abandon the proposal as he felt that the ongoing discussion was damaging the RIPE community’s reputation. As nobody stepped forward to take over the authorship of this proposal, the proposal was withdrawn.

Resource Authentication Key ( RAK ) code for third party authentication
WITHDRAWN
2016-02 RIPE NCC Services Working Group September 2016

Summary: This proposal aimed to allow all number resources, in exacts and more specifics, to be authenticated via an API-key that expires on a certain date.

Reason for withdrawal: The proposer didn't see enough community support, especially from the external database holders who would have needed to perform their own development work.

Include Legacy Internet Resource Holders in the Abuse-c Policy
WITHDRAWN
2016-01 Anti-Abuse Working Group July 2016

Summary: This proposal aimed for a mandatory abuse contact for Legacy Internet Resource Holders in the RIPE Database.

Reason for withdrawal: The proposer decided to withdraw the proposal due to the inability to find an acceptable agreement which satisfied all 
parties.

Last /8 Allocation Criteria Revision
WITHDRAWN
2015-05 Address Policy Working Group June 2016

Summary: This proposal aimed to allow LIRs to request an additional /22 IPv4 allocation from the RIPE NCC every 18 months. The latest version of the proposal introduced several requirements, such as that the LIR cannot hold more than a /20 of IPv4, must document their IPv6 deployment, and must not have transferred any IPv4 address space before.

Reason for withdrawal: The proposers decided to withdraw the proposal due to the inability to find an acceptable agreement which satisfied all parties.

Remove Multihoming Requirement for AS Number Assignments
WITHDRAWN
2014-03 Address Policy Working Group November 2015

Summary: This proposal aimed to ease the requirements when requesting an Autonomous System (AS) Number. The following actions were proposed:

  • Remove the need for evaluation
  • Limit the number of AS Numbers per organisation to 1,000
  • Require that 16-bit AS Numbers are multihomed after nine months

Reason for withdrawal: The proposers decided to withdraw the proposal due to the inability to find an acceptable solution which satisfied all parties.

Assessment Criteria for IPv6 Initial Allocation Size
ACCEPTED
2015-03 Address Policy Working Group October 2015

Summary: This proposal introduced new criteria for the evaluation of large IPv6 allocation requests. These new criteria are hierarchical and geographical structure and segmentation for security and planned longevity. The current requirements, number of users and extent of infrastructure, are retained.

Keep IPv6 PI When Requesting IPv6 Allocation
ACCEPTED
2015-02 Address Policy Working Group August 2015

Summary: This proposal removed the requirement that LIRs return their IPv6 Provider Independent (PI) assignment when requesting an IPv6 allocation if there are no specific routing requirements to justify both.