You are here: Home > Participate > Policy Development > Policy Proposals > Language Clarification in “Contractual Requirements for Provider Independent Resource Holders in the RIPE NCC Service Region”

This policy proposal has been accepted
The new RIPE Document is: ripe-637

Language Clarification in “Contractual Requirements for Provider Independent Resource Holders in the RIPE NCC Service Region”

Summary of Proposal

The RIPE NCC service region relies on clear and consistent policies. During RIPE 67, Jan Žorž raised the issue that the use of the word “should” could create unwanted ambiguity in policy documents.

According to RFC 2119, the term “should” means that there may exist valid reasons to ignore a particular item. Correspondingly, the term “must” means that the definition is an absolute requirement of the specification.

The RIPE NCC has reviewed “Contractual Requirements for Provider Independent Resource Holders” and found one occasion where “should” was used while the content and context indicate that “must” would be the appropriate term.

The finding was presented during RIPE 68 and it was agreed that the policy text should be clarified.

This proposal aims to clarify the language in the RIPE Document “Contractual Requirements for Provider Independent Resource Holders in the RIPE NCC Service Region”.

Policy Text

[The following text will update sections 2.0 in the RIPE Policy Document “Contractual Requirements for Provider Independent Resource Holders in the RIPE NCC Service Region”, if the proposal reaches consensus.]

a. Current policy text

“2.0 Contractual Responsibilities of End Users and LIRs

The preferred model of the RIPE community is for End Users to have contractual relationship with a sponsoring LIR instead of directly with the RIPE NCC. The details of any such contracts are outside the scope of this document.

However, at the minimum, all contracts should include: [...]”

b. New policy text

“2.0 Contractual Responsibilities of End Users and LIRs

The preferred model of the RIPE community is for End Users to have a contractual relationship with a sponsoring LIR instead of directly with the RIPE NCC. The details of any such contracts are outside the scope of this document.

However, at the minimum, all contracts must include: [...]”

Rationale

a. Arguments supporting the proposal

  • Unambiguous understanding of the policy text
  • The policy text describes the minimum requirements for a contract, hence these requirements are mandatory

b. Arguments opposing the proposal

  • The change will reduce the level of flexibility when interpreting the policy text

 


Impact Analysis:

Note: In order to provide additional information related to the proposal, details of an impact analysis carried out by the RIPE NCC are documented below. The projections presented in this analysis are based on existing data and should be viewed only as an indication of the possible impact that the policy might have if the proposal is accepted and implemented.

A. RIPE NCC's Understanding of the Proposed Policy

It is the RIPE NCC's understanding that this proposal clarifies the language in the RIPE Document “Contractual Requirements for Provider Independent Resource Holders in the RIPE NCC Service Region" by removing unwanted ambiguity created by the term "should". Replacing this with the term "must" confirms the policy's intention of a mandatory requirement for the minimum content of contracts between End Users and sponsoring LIRs.

This is in line with current RIPE NCC procedures.

B. Impact of Policy on Registry and Addressing System

Address/Internet Number Resource Consumption:

After analysing the data that is currently available, the RIPE NCC does not anticipate that any significant impact will be caused if this proposal is implemented.

Fragmentation/Aggregation:

After analysing the data that is currently available, the RIPE NCC does not anticipate that any significant impact will be caused if this proposal is implemented.

C. Impact of Policy on RIPE NCC Operations/Services

Registration Services:

After analysing the data that is currently available, the RIPE NCC does not anticipate that any significant impact will be caused if this proposal is implemented.

Billing/Finance Department:

After analysing the data that is currently available, the RIPE NCC does not anticipate that any significant impact will be caused if this proposal is implemented.

RIPE Database:

After analysing the data that is currently available, the RIPE NCC does not anticipate that any significant impact will be caused if this proposal is implemented.

D. Legal Impact of Policy

After analysing the data that is currently available, the RIPE NCC does not anticipate that any significant impact will be caused if this proposal is implemented.

E. Implementation

If this proposal is accepted it will be able to be implemented immediately, as existing procedures, tools and documentation are in line with this policy understanding.

Get Involved

The Address Policy Working Group develops policies relating to the allocation and registration of Internet number resources (IPv4 and IPv6 addresses and ASNs) by the RIPE NCC and its members. Anyone with an interest in Internet numbering issues is welcome to observe, participate and contribute to the WG. To post a message to the list, send an email to address-policy-wg@ripe.net. Please note that only subscribers can post messages.

RIPE Forum

The RIPE Forum is an additional way to participate in RIPE community mailing list discussions using a web-based interface rather than an email client.

Check out the forum

Please contact if you need more information.

Stay up to date!

Follow @PDO_RIPE_NCC on Twitter.