[address-policy-wg] 2010-02 Review Period has ended (Allocations from the last /8)
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2010-02 Review Period has ended (Allocations from the last /8)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] New Draft Document: Autonomous System (AS) Number Assignment Policies
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Emilio Madaio
emadaio at ripe.net
Wed Aug 4 16:30:09 CEST 2010
Dear Colleagues, The mail you received earlier today on the address-policy-wg mailing list entitled "2010-02 Review Period has ended (Allocations from the last /8)" was sent in error. Please disregard that email. Apologies for any inconvenience. Regards, Emilio Madaio On 8/4/10 4:03 PM, Emilio Madaio wrote: > Dear Gert and Sander, > > The review period for the new RIPE Document described in proposal > 2010-02 has ended. > > > You can find the full proposal at: > > http://ripe.net/ripe/policies/proposals/2010-02.html > > > > Please reply to this email to let us know how you would like to proceed. > > * Do you want to move the proposal to "Last Call"? The Last Call > period is four weeks. > > * Do you want us to edit the draft document text? Please tell us the > details that you want us to edit. > > * Do you want to extend the review period? Please let us know what > date you wish to extend it to, and we will tell the RIPE community. > > * Do you want to withdraw this proposal? > > Please let us know your decision in the next seven days. > > Below a brief summary of the discussion in the Review Phase. Some > observations were made on some points of the new proposal draft and on > the possible consequences to the proposal implementation: > > -there should be a need to mention how the PI space will be handled > (Tulyev, Davidson, Kuenzler); > > -it may be prudent to implement the policy on the last /8 contiguous > block from IANA, rather than the potential fragmented last available > /8 in the NCC address pool(Anderson); > > -possible situations when an LIR cannot justify an immediate need for > a /22 (Anderson) and therefore a suggestion to allow extra /22 > assignment overtime (Schliesser); > > -impossibility to assign Anycast address(Tulyev). > > > The archived discussion is available at > > http://www.ripe.net/ripe/maillists/archives/address-policy-wg/2010/index-thread.html > > We look forward to your response. > > Kind Regards > > Emilio Madaio > Policy Development Officer > RIPE NCC > >
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2010-02 Review Period has ended (Allocations from the last /8)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] New Draft Document: Autonomous System (AS) Number Assignment Policies
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]