From emadaio at ripe.net Fri Jun 1 13:57:44 2012 From: emadaio at ripe.net (Emilio Madaio) Date: Fri, 01 Jun 2012 13:57:44 +0200 Subject: [address-policy-wg] 2011-05 Proposal Accepted (Safeguarding future IXPs with IPv4 space) Message-ID: Dear Colleagues, Consensus has been reached, and the proposal for a change to RIPE Document ripe-530, "IPv4 Address Allocation and Assignment Policies for the RIPE NCC Service Region", has been accepted by the RIPE community. You can find the full proposal at: https://www.ripe.net/ripe/policies/proposals/2011-05 The updated RIPE Document is ripe-553 and is available at: http://ripe.net/ripe/docs/ripe-553.html Thank you for your input. Regards Emilio Madaio Policy Development Officer RIPE NCC From emadaio at ripe.net Mon Jun 4 14:24:42 2012 From: emadaio at ripe.net (Emilio Madaio) Date: Mon, 04 Jun 2012 14:24:42 +0200 Subject: [address-policy-wg] 2012-05 New Policy Proposal (Transparency in Address Block Transfers) Message-ID: Dear Colleagues, A proposed change to RIPE Document ripe-553, "IPv4 Address Allocation and Assignment Policies for the RIPE NCC Service Region", is now available for discussion. You can find the full proposal at: https://www.ripe.net/ripe/policies/proposals/2012-05 We encourage you to review this proposal and send your comments to before 2 July 2012. Regards Emilio Madaio Policy Development Officer RIPE NCC From maildanrl at googlemail.com Mon Jun 4 19:45:11 2012 From: maildanrl at googlemail.com (Dan Luedtke) Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2012 19:45:11 +0200 Subject: [address-policy-wg] [policy-announce] 2012-05 New Policy Proposal (Transparency in Address Block Transfers) In-Reply-To: <4fcca925.148bcd0a.28e7.05c4SMTPIN_ADDED@mx.google.com> References: <4fcca925.148bcd0a.28e7.05c4SMTPIN_ADDED@mx.google.com> Message-ID: > The list will be updated monthly In periods of heavy transfers, this might be a little to slow. Is weekly an option? Does it create more work for RIPE NCC or will the list be auto-generated anyway? Can someone in favor of monthly updates clarify why monthly was chosen? Regards Dan -- Dan Luedtke http://www.danrl.de From mueller at syr.edu Mon Jun 4 20:27:23 2012 From: mueller at syr.edu (Milton L Mueller) Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2012 18:27:23 +0000 Subject: [address-policy-wg] [policy-announce] 2012-05 New Policy Proposal (Transparency in Address Block Transfers) In-Reply-To: References: <4fcca925.148bcd0a.28e7.05c4SMTPIN_ADDED@mx.google.com> Message-ID: <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD2182203@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> Dan: Monthly was a kind of default modeled on the ARIN policy and for minimizing the administrative burden, but there was nothing magical about the interval. If people think a more rapid interval is needed, I would not object. --MM > -----Original Message----- > From: address-policy-wg-bounces at ripe.net [mailto:address-policy-wg- > bounces at ripe.net] On Behalf Of Dan Luedtke > Sent: Monday, June 04, 2012 1:45 PM > To: address-policy-wg at ripe.net > Subject: Re: [address-policy-wg] [policy-announce] 2012-05 New Policy > Proposal (Transparency in Address Block Transfers) > > > The list will be updated monthly > In periods of heavy transfers, this might be a little to slow. > Is weekly an option? Does it create more work for RIPE NCC or will the > list be auto-generated anyway? Can someone in favor of monthly updates > clarify why monthly was chosen? > > Regards > Dan > -- > Dan Luedtke > http://www.danrl.de From oalfageme at euskaltel.com Tue Jun 5 12:27:37 2012 From: oalfageme at euskaltel.com (Octavio Alfageme) Date: Tue, 5 Jun 2012 12:27:37 +0200 Subject: [address-policy-wg] [policy-announce] 2012-05 New Policy Message-ID: <926B3F6738AA624F93C55B77DBE2ED60029F92E3@CORREO.corporativo.euskaltel.es> Dear all, First of all, sorry if this question was already addressed in the past, but I find a gap between the policy proposal and IPv4 market dynamics. According to the proposal, transfer would be approved if the receiving LIR fulfills requirements of Section 5.3 Additional Allocations. I personally agree with this requirement, but my doubt is how coherent it is with a real market scenario. A LIR selling an allocation would look for the best offer, regardless of the IPv4 allocation status with respect to Section 5.3 requirements of the purchasing LIR. Which would be the situation of a LIR acquiring IPv4 address blocks but unable to fulfill transfer requirements? Which would be the way to solve this situation? Kind regards Octavio Alfageme -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sander at steffann.nl Tue Jun 5 15:00:56 2012 From: sander at steffann.nl (Sander Steffann) Date: Tue, 5 Jun 2012 15:00:56 +0200 Subject: [address-policy-wg] [policy-announce] 2012-05 New Policy In-Reply-To: <926B3F6738AA624F93C55B77DBE2ED60029F92E3@CORREO.corporativo.euskaltel.es> References: <926B3F6738AA624F93C55B77DBE2ED60029F92E3@CORREO.corporativo.euskaltel.es> Message-ID: <1483A028-0BCA-46FA-91E9-FA2FEE582E39@steffann.nl> Hello Octavio, > First of all, sorry if this question was already addressed in the past, but I find a gap between the policy proposal and IPv4 market dynamics. > > According to the proposal, transfer would be approved if the receiving LIR fulfills requirements of Section 5.3 Additional Allocations. I personally agree with this requirement, but my doubt is how coherent it is with a real market scenario. A LIR selling an allocation would look for the best offer, regardless of the IPv4 allocation status with respect to Section 5.3 requirements of the purchasing LIR. Which would be the situation of a LIR acquiring IPv4 address blocks but unable to fulfill transfer requirements? Which would be the way to solve this situation? Then the RIPE NCC will not accept the transfer, and the resources will remain allocated to the 'seller'... Met vriendelijke groet, Sander Steffann From dogwallah at gmail.com Tue Jun 5 15:39:02 2012 From: dogwallah at gmail.com (McTim) Date: Tue, 5 Jun 2012 08:39:02 -0500 Subject: [address-policy-wg] 2012-05 New Policy Proposal (Transparency in Address Block Transfers) In-Reply-To: <4fcca92e.4d5e0e0a.2ba4.ffffaacaSMTPIN_ADDED@mx.google.com> References: <4fcca92e.4d5e0e0a.2ba4.ffffaacaSMTPIN_ADDED@mx.google.com> Message-ID: On Mon, Jun 4, 2012 at 7:24 AM, Emilio Madaio wrote: > > Dear Colleagues, > > A proposed change to RIPE Document ripe-553, "IPv4 Address Allocation > and Assignment Policies for the RIPE NCC Service Region", is now > available for discussion. Besides publishing a list of v4 resources that have been moved, what does this accomplish that sub-allocations don't already do? Is the recipient LIR charged according to the resources under their registry file? -- Cheers, McTim "A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A route indicates how we get there."? Jon Postel From mueller at syr.edu Tue Jun 5 16:28:08 2012 From: mueller at syr.edu (Milton L Mueller) Date: Tue, 5 Jun 2012 14:28:08 +0000 Subject: [address-policy-wg] 2012-05 New Policy Proposal (Transparency in Address Block Transfers) In-Reply-To: References: <4fcca92e.4d5e0e0a.2ba4.ffffaacaSMTPIN_ADDED@mx.google.com> Message-ID: <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD218277F@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> > -----Original Message----- > > Besides publishing a list of v4 resources that have been moved, That is the sum and substance of what 2012-05 is intended to do. It does what ARIN and APNIC already do: provide an accessible list of resources that have been moved according to the transfer policies in place. > what does this accomplish that sub-allocations don't already do? > Is the recipient LIR charged according to the resources under their > registry file? Like the previous question that was raised, you seem to be asking questions about the transfer policy itself, not about this proposal. The transfer policy already exists and it is what it is. All this proposal does it let the community know who is using it, and to better assess and track its consequences. --MM From richih.mailinglist at gmail.com Tue Jun 5 18:04:32 2012 From: richih.mailinglist at gmail.com (Richard Hartmann) Date: Tue, 5 Jun 2012 18:04:32 +0200 Subject: [address-policy-wg] [policy-announce] 2012-05 New Policy Proposal (Transparency in Address Block Transfers) In-Reply-To: <4fcca925.86650e0a.42d8.ffffab3cSMTPIN_ADDED@mx.google.com> References: <4fcca925.86650e0a.42d8.ffffab3cSMTPIN_ADDED@mx.google.com> Message-ID: I agree with this proposal. Monthly or anything more rapid, I don't care; still vote +1. Richard From sandra.sendra.upv at gmail.com Wed Jun 6 10:40:10 2012 From: sandra.sendra.upv at gmail.com (Sandra Sendra) Date: Wed, 6 Jun 2012 10:40:10 +0200 Subject: [address-policy-wg] Last 4 Days: GreeNets 2012: October 24-26, 2012 - Gandia, Spain Message-ID: <201206060840.q568e9G1012530@smtp.upv.es> ==================================================================================== 2nd International Conference on Green Communications and Networking - GreeNets 2012 24th and 26th October 2012 Gandia, Spain http://greenets.org/ ==================================================================================== HIGHLIGHTS - The event is endorsed by the European Alliance for Innovation (www.eai.eu), a leading community-based organisation devoted to the advancement of innovation in the field of ICT - All accepted papers will be published by Springer and made available through SpringerLink Digital Library, one of the world's largest scientific libraries - Proceedings will be submitted for indexing by Google Scholar, ISI, EI Compendex, Scopus and many more - Best papers will be selected to be included in one of the special issues that will be published in: Future Internet, Network Protocols and Algorithms, Recent Patent in Telecommunications CALL FOR PAPERS [Scope] Global warming and climate change have been a growing worldwide concern. Six sources, i.e., transportation, power, buildings, industry, agriculture and forestry, and land use, have been identified as major contributors to the rise of global carbon dioxide (CO2). The mobile industry is seen as a potential enabler to reduce greenhouse gases contributed by these six sources provided that appropriate measures are implemented. On the other hand, the mobile industry itself will also contribute to CO2 emission through network operations, mobile equipments, etc. To meet the requirement of low-carbon economy development, it is necessary to reduce the operation expenditure or energy consumption of mobile networks, while maintaining acceptable quality of service. This conference will explore and explain the scope and challenges of designing, building, and deploying GreeNets. In this regard, the conference aims to establish a forum to bring together research professionals from diverse fields including green mobile networks, system architectures, networking & communication protocols, applications, test-bed and prototype, traffic balance and energy-efficient cooperation transmission, system and application issues related to GreeNets. [Topics] The conference invites original technical papers that were not previously published and are not currently under review for publication elsewhere. Topics include, but are not limited to: - Communications and Networking: Communication techniques and protocols for GreeNets Energy-efficient transmission technologies based on the cooperation communication Scalable and flexible energy efficiency mobile network architectures, deployments, and applications - Energy-efficient network architecture & protocols: Scalability and mobility issues in energy efficiency cross-layer design MAC Protocols and QoS Designing for mobile networks - Systems and Technology: Transactions and workflows in green mobile networks Adaptability and stability of green mobile networks Mobile and multimedia supported green mobile networks Experimental and test bed studies for energy efficiency mobile networks, simulation tools - Energy-efficient management: Energy-efficient traffic balance, cooperation and management Distributed energy efficiency resource management techniques Protocols for cooperative management and control [Publications] Accepted papers will be published in Springer's LNICST series and will appear in the SpringerLink, one of the largest digital libraries online that covers a variety of scientific disciplines, as well as in the ICST's own EU Digital Library (EUDL). LNICST volumes are submitted for inclusion to leading indexing services, including DBLP, Google Scholar, ACM Digital Library, ISI Proceedings, EI Engineering Index, CrossRef, Scopus. [Special Issues] Best papers will be selected to be included in one of the special issues that will be published in: Future Internet (ISSN 1999-5903) Network Protocols and Algorithms (ISSN 1 943-3581) Recent Patent in Telecommunications (ISSN: 2211-7407 (Print) ISSN: 2211-7415 (Online)) [Paper submission] All the papers formatted according with the instructions have to be submitted through the conference online system at: http://greenets.org/submission.shtml [Important dates] Abstract Submission Deadline: June 10, 2012 Full Paper Deadline: June 10, 2012 Notification of Acceptance: July 6, 2012 Camera-ready: August 11, 2012 Conference dates: 24th - 26th October 2012 [Conference organizing committees] General Co-Chairs: Jaime Lloret, Universidad Politecnica de Valencia, Spain Joel Rodrigues, Institute of Telecommunications, University of Beira Interior, Portugal TPC Co-Chairs: Liang Zhou, Nanjing University of Posts and Telcommunications, China Eduardo Nakamura, Federal Univ. of Amazonas, Brazil Industry Track Chair: Jose Maria Alcaraz Calero, Hewlett Packard Laboratories, Bristol, UK Workshop Chair: Javier Aguiar, University of Valladolid, Spain Special Session Chair: Jose Soler, Danmarks Tekniske Universitet, Denmark Vivek S. Deshpande, MIT College of Engineering, Pune, India Panel Chair: A.v. Senthil Kumar, HINDUSTHAN College of Arts & Science, India Posters Chair: Kayhan Zrar Ghafoor, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, Malaysia Local Co-Chairs: Diana Bri, Universidad Politecncia de Valencia, Spain Miguel Garcia, Universidad Politecncia de Valencia, Spain Publicity Chairs: Sandra Sendra, Univ. Politecnica de Valencia, Spain Min Chen, Seoul National University, Korea Web Chair: Alejandro Canovas, Universidad Politecncia de Valencia, Spain Steering Committee: Athanasios Vasilakos, National Technical University of Athens (NTUA), Greece Imrich Chlamtac, Creat-Net, Italy ABOUT EAI The European Alliance for Innovation is a dynamic eco-system for fostering ICT enabled innovation to improve European competitiveness and to benefit society. EAI uses open e-platforms to inspire grassroots collaboration among all relevant actors, from organizations to individuals, to stimulate community driven innovation to its institutional and individual members worldwide. Through EAI, organizations find ideas and talent, and individual innovators find organizations for their ingenuity and craft. Join the innovation community at www.eai.eu UNSUBSCRIBE If you believed you have received this email in error, or do not want to receive emails from us in the future, please send an email to unsubscribe at eai.eu. From ispyroul at ripe.net Mon Jun 11 10:44:32 2012 From: ispyroul at ripe.net (Ioanna Spyroulia) Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2012 10:44:32 +0200 Subject: [address-policy-wg] 2011-04 Implementation: Extension of the Minimum Size for IPv6 Initial Allocation Message-ID: <4FD5AFF0.2020601@ripe.net> [Apologies for duplicate emails] Dear colleagues, The RIPE NCC has started the implementation of the accepted RIPE Policy Proposal 2011-04, "Extension of the Minimum Size for IPv6 Initial Allocation". We expect that by the end of July we will be ready to: - Extend an IPv6 /32 allocation up to a /29 - Issue an initial IPv6 allocation up to a /29 We will inform you about further details of the implementation closer to the date. You can find the full proposal at: https://www.ripe.net/ripe/policies/proposals/2011-04 The updated RIPE Document is ripe-552 and is available at: http://ripe.net/ripe/docs/ripe-552.html If you have any comments or questions, please contact . -- Kind Regards Ioanna Spyroulia RIPE Network Coordination Centre Phone:+31 20 535 4444 Fax:+31 20 535 4445 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From emadaio at ripe.net Thu Jun 21 15:07:36 2012 From: emadaio at ripe.net (Emilio Madaio) Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2012 15:07:36 +0200 Subject: [address-policy-wg] 2012-04 Discussion Period extended until 19 July (PI Assignments from the last /8) Message-ID: Dear Colleagues, The text of the policy proposal 2012-04, "PI Assignments from the last /8", has been revised. We have published the new version (version 2.0) today. As a result a new Discussion Phase is set for the proposal. Highlights of the changes in version 2.0 are: -added clause 4 to section 5.6.2 You can find the full proposal at: https://www.ripe.net/ripe/policies/proposals/2012-04 We encourage you to review this policy proposal and send your comments to before 19 July. Regards, Emilio Madaio Policy Development Officer RIPE NCC From gert at space.net Thu Jun 28 13:14:42 2012 From: gert at space.net (Gert Doering) Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2012 13:14:42 +0200 Subject: [address-policy-wg] APWG RIPE 64 draft minutes - now online Message-ID: <20120628111442.GJ38127@Space.Net> Dear Working Group, the draft minutes from RIPE 64 are now online at: https://www.ripe.net/ripe/groups/wg/ap/minutes/ripe-64 (a big thanks to the good people at the RIPE NCC for this) If there is anything that you miss, or remember differently, please let us know to get it corrected. Gert Doering -- APWG chair -- have you enabled IPv6 on something today...? SpaceNet AG Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann D-80807 Muenchen HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen) Tel: +49 (89) 32356-444 USt-IdNr.: DE813185279