From emadaio at ripe.net Tue Mar 6 16:41:23 2012 From: emadaio at ripe.net (Emilio Madaio) Date: Tue, 06 Mar 2012 16:41:23 +0100 Subject: [address-policy-wg] 2011-05 New Draft Document Published (Safeguarding future IXPs with IPv4 space) Message-ID: Dear Colleagues, The text of RIPE Policy Proposal 2011-05, "Safeguarding future IXPs with IPv4 space", has been revised based on the community feedback received on the mailing list. We have published the new version (version 3.0) today. Highlights of the changes in version 3.0 are: -a new punctuation is used in the first bullet point of the proposed section 5.6.2 As per RIPE document ripe-500, "Policy Development Process in RIPE", the suggested change was not considered significant to require a new Discussion Phase. Hence the proposal moves to the Review Phase of the RIPE Policy Development Process. The draft document for the proposal has been published. The impact analysis that was conducted for this proposal has also been published You can find the full proposal and impact analysis at: http://www.ripe.net/ripe/policies/proposals/2011-05 and the draft document at: http://www.ripe.net/ripe/policies/proposals/2011-05/draft We encourage you to read the draft document text and send any comments to address-policy-wg at ripe.net before 3 April 2011. Regards Emilio Madaio Policy Development Officer RIPE NCC From gert at space.net Fri Mar 16 15:02:42 2012 From: gert at space.net (Gert Doering) Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2012 15:02:42 +0100 Subject: [address-policy-wg] APWG meeting at RIPE 64 - draft agenda 1 Message-ID: <20120316140242.GS84425@Space.Net> Hi APWG folks, RIPE meeting orga, below you can find a draft for the RIPE address policy WG meeting's agenda, which will take place in Ljubljana in the following two time slots: Wednesday, Apr 18, 09:00 - 10:30 Thursday, Apr 19, 09:00 - 10:30 The exact time lines depend a bit on how much discussion is going on, so we might move items one time slot "up" or "down". If you have anything else you want to see on the agenda, or of we need to change anything, please let us know. regards, Gert Doering, APWG chair ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Wednesday, 09:00-10:30 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- A. Administrative Matters (welcome, thanking the scribe, approving the minutes, etc.) B. Current Policy Topics - Emilio Madaio - global policy overview "what's going on?" - common policy topics in all regions (end of IPv4, transfers, ...) - overview over concluded proposals in the RIPE region since RIPE63 [list of things that the WG chairs collective agrees on] - brief overview over new proposals (if any) D. Feedback From NCC Registration Service - Alex le Heux E. What Is Consensus? Lessons learned from past policy proposals (APWG chairs) F. Discussion of open policy proposals 2011-04 extension of the Minimum Size for IPv6 initial allocations 2011-05 safeguarding future IXPs with IPv4 space ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Thursday, 09:00-10:30 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- K. IPv4 maintenance policy - Rob Blokzijl L. On IPv6 PI/PA Unification - update, discussion (APWG chairs) M. Discussion of open policy proposals, part II (if needed) N. Revisit IPv6 "additional allocation" policy (people on the list expressed unhappiness with the current policy, so please speak up! - Discussion led by Jan Zorz) Y. Open Policy Hour "The Open Policy Hour (OPH) is a showcase for your policy ideas. If you have a policy proposal you'd like to debut, prior to formally submitting it, here is your opportunity." Z. AOB From emadaio at ripe.net Tue Mar 20 15:31:20 2012 From: emadaio at ripe.net (Emilio Madaio) Date: Tue, 20 Mar 2012 15:31:20 +0100 Subject: [address-policy-wg] Cosmetic Surgery Project: New Draft Document for Reverse Address Delegation of IPv4 and IPv6 Address Space Message-ID: <4F6894B8.8040503@ripe.net> Dear colleagues, As part of the Cosmetic Surgery Project, the RIPE NCC is moving forward with a review of the policy document ripe-302, "Policy for Reverse Address Delegation of IPv4 and IPv6 address space in the RIPE NCC Service Region". A draft of the policy document is now online and ready for community review at: https://www.ripe.net/ripe/readability/improving-the-readability-of-ripe-documents It was decided in the Address Policy Working Group session at RIPE 63 that, in light of current policy discussions and proposed changes to the IPv6 policy framework, the RIPE NCC will put its review of the IPv6 policy documents (ripe-512, ripe-451, ripe-233) on hold. We encourage you to read the edited draft of ripe-302 and send any comments to by 17 April 2012. Kind Regards, Emilio Madaio Policy Development Officer, RIPE NCC From jan at go6.si Tue Mar 20 18:56:38 2012 From: jan at go6.si (Jan Zorz @ go6.si) Date: Tue, 20 Mar 2012 18:56:38 +0100 Subject: [address-policy-wg] 2011-04 - proposal ended the Review phase Message-ID: <4F68C4D6.5000605@go6.si> Dear AP WG... While the chairs are evaluating the recent discussion as per PDP, for clarification, the remarks you made were identified and taken into consideration under other circumstances out of the scope of 2011-04. In the last ml posts some remarks on some side issues came up. I hope that we clearly explained that those issues were out of the scope of the current proposal and also kindly offer to take on them in another settings - and as I see in draft APWG meeting agenda I was somehow "volunteered" to start with some live discussion in Ljubljana around possibility of reviewing the additional IPv6 allocation policy. Please, have in mind, that that does not mean, that I'll necessarily review the policy - that means that at that slot on stage I'll try to ask some questions and we need a clear response or statement from community if there is a need to review that policy - and if yes, to form a group of interested people to do the work. We can also start this discussion before the meeting in Ljubljana in order to have some initial ideas where to go and what is the current "heat" in the group. Cheers from more and more "hot and springy" Slovenia, Jan Zorz From andrea at ripe.net Thu Mar 22 17:48:31 2012 From: andrea at ripe.net (Andrea Cima) Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2012 17:48:31 +0100 Subject: [address-policy-wg] New AS Number Blocks allocated to the RIPE NCC Message-ID: <4F6B57DF.9020600@ripe.net> Dear Colleagues, The RIPE NCC has received the following AS Number Blocks from the IANA in March 2012. 59392-60415 60416-61439 198656-199679 You may want to update your records accordingly. Best regards, Andrea Cima Registration Services Manager RIPE NCC From gert at space.net Thu Mar 29 13:21:04 2012 From: gert at space.net (Gert Doering) Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2012 13:21:04 +0200 Subject: [address-policy-wg] 2011-05 New Draft Document Published (Safeguarding future IXPs with IPv4 space) In-Reply-To: <1331048500.30490@mobil.space.net> References: <1331048500.30490@mobil.space.net> Message-ID: <20120329112104.GA72789@Space.Net> Dear Address-Policy WG, (cc'ing the EIX wg due to "this is where the proposal came from") after a very lifely debate in the early stages of this proposal, you have been VERY quiet in this review phase. Specifically, *no* comments have been voiced, and this is not enough for the proposal to go anywhere - so unless I see a few more comments really soon now, we'll have to extend the review phase. Please let us know whether this version 3.0 of the proposal is what you want to see become policy, or whether you oppose it. If you oppose it, please make clear whether you oppose the general idea or just specific aspects of the proposal as written now. thanks, Gert Doering, APWG chair On Tue, Mar 06, 2012 at 04:41:23PM +0100, Emilio Madaio wrote: > > Dear Colleagues, > > The text of RIPE Policy Proposal 2011-05, "Safeguarding future IXPs > with IPv4 space", has been revised based on the community feedback > received on the mailing list. We have published the new version > (version 3.0) today. > > Highlights of the changes in version 3.0 are: > > -a new punctuation is used in the first bullet point of the proposed > section 5.6.2 > > > As per RIPE document ripe-500, "Policy Development Process in RIPE", > the suggested change was not considered significant to require a new > Discussion Phase. Hence the proposal moves to the Review Phase of the > RIPE Policy Development Process. > > The draft document for the proposal has been published. The impact > analysis that was conducted for this proposal has also been published > > > You can find the full proposal and impact analysis at: > > http://www.ripe.net/ripe/policies/proposals/2011-05 > > and the draft document at: > > http://www.ripe.net/ripe/policies/proposals/2011-05/draft > > > We encourage you to read the draft document text and send any comments > to address-policy-wg at ripe.net before 3 April 2011. > > Regards > > Emilio Madaio > Policy Development Officer > RIPE NCC > > Gert Doering -- NetMaster -- 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 From boggits at gmail.com Thu Mar 29 13:29:16 2012 From: boggits at gmail.com (boggits) Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2012 12:29:16 +0100 Subject: [address-policy-wg] 2011-05 New Draft Document Published (Safeguarding future IXPs with IPv4 space) In-Reply-To: <20120329112104.GA72789@Space.Net> References: <1331048500.30490@mobil.space.net> <20120329112104.GA72789@Space.Net> Message-ID: On 29 March 2012 12:21, Gert Doering wrote: > Dear Address-Policy WG, > ?(cc'ing the EIX wg due to "this is where the proposal came from") > > after a very lifely debate in the early stages of this proposal, you > have been VERY quiet in this review phase. > > Specifically, *no* comments have been voiced, and this is not enough > for the proposal to go anywhere - so unless I see a few more comments > really soon now, we'll have to extend the review phase. I thought I saw a lot of "we support this" emails (mostly from IX operators), if not then I'll start with "I support this policy" J -- James Blessing 07989 039 476 From gert at space.net Thu Mar 29 14:36:16 2012 From: gert at space.net (Gert Doering) Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2012 14:36:16 +0200 Subject: [address-policy-wg] [eix-wg] 2011-05 New Draft Document Published (Safeguarding future IXPs with IPv4 space) In-Reply-To: References: <1331048500.30490@mobil.space.net> <20120329112104.GA72789@Space.Net> Message-ID: <20120329123616.GP84425@Space.Net> Hi, On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 12:29:16PM +0100, boggits wrote: > I thought I saw a lot of "we support this" emails (mostly from IX > operators), if not then I'll start with "I support this policy" Those were all in the initial discussion phase. I don't need a full repetition of all these, but a few statements of position in the review phase *are* helpful, to see whether people are still agreeing, even if the text has changed somewhat between v1.0 and v3.0 :-) By definition, in "Last Call", we have "silence is consent" but that's not true for the earlier phases. Thanks for your voice ;-) 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 From chrish at consol.net Thu Mar 29 15:02:02 2012 From: chrish at consol.net (Chris) Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2012 15:02:02 +0200 Subject: [address-policy-wg] [eix-wg] 2011-05 New Draft Document Published (Safeguarding future IXPs with IPv4 space) In-Reply-To: <20120329123616.GP84425@Space.Net> References: <1331048500.30490@mobil.space.net> <20120329112104.GA72789@Space.Net> <20120329123616.GP84425@Space.Net> Message-ID: <4F745D4A.9020801@consol.net> hi! On 03/29/2012 02:36 PM, Gert Doering wrote: > repetition of all these, but a few statements of position in the review > phase *are* helpful, to see whether people are still agreeing, even if the well then, i still do not agree and am still convinced every requester had to be treated equal, without anyone being more equal than others. regards, Chris From lists-ripe at c4inet.net Thu Mar 29 15:08:42 2012 From: lists-ripe at c4inet.net (Sascha Luck) Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2012 14:08:42 +0100 Subject: [address-policy-wg] [eix-wg] 2011-05 New Draft Document Published (Safeguarding future IXPs with IPv4 space) In-Reply-To: <20120329123616.GP84425@Space.Net> References: <1331048500.30490@mobil.space.net> <20120329112104.GA72789@Space.Net> <20120329123616.GP84425@Space.Net> Message-ID: <20120329130842.GB56063@cilantro.c4inet.net> On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 02:36:16PM +0200, Gert Doering wrote: >Those were all in the initial discussion phase. I don't need a full >repetition of all these, but a few statements of position in the review >phase *are* helpful, to see whether people are still agreeing, even if the >text has changed somewhat between v1.0 and v3.0 :-) I'm ok with the proposal. Even "new" IXPs will be connecting existing SPs that already have IPv4 legacy space. Other new organisations will have to build ipv6-only networks eventually anyway. Withholding a /16 from those is not going to have a noticeable impact on the Internet. rgds, Sascha Luck From slz at baycix.de Thu Mar 29 15:45:43 2012 From: slz at baycix.de (Sascha Lenz) Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2012 15:45:43 +0200 Subject: [address-policy-wg] 2011-05 New Draft Document Published (Safeguarding future IXPs with IPv4 space) In-Reply-To: <20120329112104.GA72789@Space.Net> References: <1331048500.30490@mobil.space.net> <20120329112104.GA72789@Space.Net> Message-ID: *cry* > Dear Address-Policy WG, > (cc'ing the EIX wg due to "this is where the proposal came from") > > after a very lifely debate in the early stages of this proposal, you > have been VERY quiet in this review phase. > > Specifically, *no* comments have been voiced, and this is not enough > for the proposal to go anywhere - so unless I see a few more comments > really soon now, we'll have to extend the review phase. > > Please let us know whether this version 3.0 of the proposal is what > you want to see become policy, or whether you oppose it. If you oppose > it, please make clear whether you oppose the general idea or just > specific aspects of the proposal as written now. > this is one of those situations ... trying to be a good netizen, even checking and commenting on proposals which i only have a personal opinion of, no real professional one since i don't deal with IXPs so much lately in this case (unfortunately) - but keeping track of which ones i've already said something to, and in which review phase seems to be impossible for an old brain. Some much more intelligent person than me really should come up with a better PDP or some supporting tools to the PDP process beyond the mailinglist archive. But i sensed some opposition to some "informal voting tool" on drafts over the past years :-( Having said that: I still support this proposal ( i think i supported it in earlier phases ) Reasoning: Even though i also think (like some others) that there shouldn't be "special people/companies/etc.", i deem IXPs important enough for the development of the internet in a whole to justify an exception. Also, one less /16 in the pool isn't going to end the world (OTOH it probably would end the IPv4 world one week earlier, but that would be a good thing actually) I think, the community and the NCC can make sure that this "special policy" cannot be abused by fake IXPs or so. -- Mit freundlichen Gr??en / Kind Regards Sascha Lenz [SLZ-RIPE] Senior System- & Network Architect From jan at go6.si Thu Mar 29 15:52:43 2012 From: jan at go6.si (Jan Zorz @ go6.si) Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2012 15:52:43 +0200 Subject: [address-policy-wg] [eix-wg] 2011-05 New Draft Document Published (Safeguarding future IXPs with IPv4 space) In-Reply-To: <20120329130842.GB56063@cilantro.c4inet.net> References: <1331048500.30490@mobil.space.net> <20120329112104.GA72789@Space.Net> <20120329123616.GP84425@Space.Net> <20120329130842.GB56063@cilantro.c4inet.net> Message-ID: <4F74692B.7070705@go6.si> On 3/29/12 3:08 PM, Sascha Luck wrote: > On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 02:36:16PM +0200, Gert Doering wrote: >> Those were all in the initial discussion phase. I don't need a full >> repetition of all these, but a few statements of position in the review >> phase *are* helpful, to see whether people are still agreeing, even if >> the >> text has changed somewhat between v1.0 and v3.0 :-) > > I'm ok with the proposal. > > Even "new" IXPs will be connecting existing SPs that already have IPv4 > legacy space. Other new organisations will have to build ipv6-only > networks eventually anyway. Withholding a /16 from those is not going to > have a noticeable impact on the Internet. +1 Jan From Remco.vanMook at eu.equinix.com Thu Mar 29 15:47:34 2012 From: Remco.vanMook at eu.equinix.com (Remco Van Mook) Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2012 14:47:34 +0100 Subject: [address-policy-wg] 2011-05 New Draft Document Published (Safeguarding future IXPs with IPv4 space) In-Reply-To: <20120329112104.GA72789@Space.Net> Message-ID: I support this policy. Reserving the space has no significant impact on IPv4 runout globally but will enable future exchange platforms to be established and existing ones to expand, which is vital for the future growth of the Internet. Remco van Mook Director of Interconnection, EMEA remco.vanmook at eu.equinix.com +31 61 135 6365 MOB EQUINIX 51-53 Great Marlborough Street London, W1F 7JT, United Kingdom On 29-03-12 13:21, "Gert Doering" wrote: >Dear Address-Policy WG, > (cc'ing the EIX wg due to "this is where the proposal came from") > >after a very lifely debate in the early stages of this proposal, you >have been VERY quiet in this review phase. > >Specifically, *no* comments have been voiced, and this is not enough >for the proposal to go anywhere - so unless I see a few more comments >really soon now, we'll have to extend the review phase. > >Please let us know whether this version 3.0 of the proposal is what >you want to see become policy, or whether you oppose it. If you oppose >it, please make clear whether you oppose the general idea or just >specific aspects of the proposal as written now. > >thanks, > >Gert Doering, > APWG chair > > >On Tue, Mar 06, 2012 at 04:41:23PM +0100, Emilio Madaio wrote: >> >> Dear Colleagues, >> >> The text of RIPE Policy Proposal 2011-05, "Safeguarding future IXPs >> with IPv4 space", has been revised based on the community feedback >> received on the mailing list. We have published the new version >> (version 3.0) today. >> >> Highlights of the changes in version 3.0 are: >> >> -a new punctuation is used in the first bullet point of the proposed >> section 5.6.2 >> >> >> As per RIPE document ripe-500, "Policy Development Process in RIPE", >> the suggested change was not considered significant to require a new >> Discussion Phase. Hence the proposal moves to the Review Phase of the >> RIPE Policy Development Process. >> >> The draft document for the proposal has been published. The impact >> analysis that was conducted for this proposal has also been published >> >> >> You can find the full proposal and impact analysis at: >> >> http://www.ripe.net/ripe/policies/proposals/2011-05 >> >> and the draft document at: >> >> http://www.ripe.net/ripe/policies/proposals/2011-05/draft >> >> >> We encourage you to read the draft document text and send any comments >> to address-policy-wg at ripe.net before 3 April 2011. >> >> Regards >> >> Emilio Madaio >> Policy Development Officer >> RIPE NCC >> >> > > >Gert Doering > -- NetMaster >-- >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 > This email is from Equinix Europe Limited or one of its associated/subsidiary companies. This email, and any files transmitted with it, contains information which is confidential, may be legally privileged and is solely for the use of the intended recipient. If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete this email immediately. Equinix Europe Limited. Registered Office: Quadrant House, 4 Thomas More Square, London E1W 1YW. Registered in England and Wales, No. 6293383. From florian.hibler at euro-transit.net Fri Mar 30 09:57:13 2012 From: florian.hibler at euro-transit.net (Florian Hibler - EuroTransit GmbH) Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2012 09:57:13 +0200 Subject: [address-policy-wg] [eix-wg] 2011-05 New Draft Document Published (Safeguarding future IXPs with IPv4 space) In-Reply-To: <31C0727C-31A2-45E9-91B6-B7FF078C3945@euro-transit.net> References: <31C0727C-31A2-45E9-91B6-B7FF078C3945@euro-transit.net> Message-ID: <2F44C731-D519-4259-B20D-3EC3480BDD4C@euro-transit.net> Hi everyone, sorry had too less coffee this morning ;) I wanted to say, that I agree with Remco. Best regards, Florian EuroTransit GmbH global IP transit and carrier services Chief Technical Officer Alsterufer 30, D-20354 Hamburg fon: +49 40 41354058 fax: +49 40 41354893 E-Mail: florian.hibler at euro-transit.net Internet: http://www.euro-transit.net EuroTransit GmbH CEO: Andy Fischer Commercial Registry: Amtsgericht Hamburg HRB 107158 VAT Number: DE219346766 Registered Office: Hamburg, Germany Notice: This transmittal and/or attachments may be privileged or confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that you have received this transmittal in error; any review, dissemination, or copying is strictly prohibited. If you received this transmittal in error, please notify us immediately by reply and immediately delete this message and all its attachments. Thank you. On Mar 30, 2012, at 9:41 AM, Florian Hibler - EuroTransit GmbH wrote: > Hi everyone, > I support this policy as well. > > Same objections as Remco on this topic. > > Have a nice day/weekend! > > Best regards, > Florian > > EuroTransit GmbH > global IP transit and carrier services > Chief Technical Officer > > Alsterufer 30, D-20354 Hamburg > fon: +49 40 41354058 > fax: +49 40 41354893 > E-Mail: florian.hibler at euro-transit.net > Internet: http://www.euro-transit.net > > EuroTransit GmbH > CEO: Andy Fischer > Commercial Registry: Amtsgericht Hamburg HRB 107158 > VAT Number: DE219346766 > Registered Office: Hamburg, Germany > > Notice: This transmittal and/or attachments may be privileged or confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that you have received this transmittal in error; any review, dissemination, or copying is strictly prohibited. If you received this transmittal in error, please notify us immediately by reply and immediately delete this message and all its attachments. Thank you. > > > > > > > > > On Mar 29, 2012, at 3:47 PM, Remco Van Mook wrote: > >> >> I support this policy. Reserving the space has no significant impact on >> IPv4 runout globally but will enable future exchange platforms to be >> established and existing ones to expand, which is vital for the future >> growth of the Internet. >> >> Remco van Mook >> Director of Interconnection, EMEA >> >> remco.vanmook at eu.equinix.com >> +31 61 135 6365 MOB >> >> EQUINIX >> 51-53 Great Marlborough Street >> London, W1F 7JT, United Kingdom >> >> >> >> >> >> >> On 29-03-12 13:21, "Gert Doering" wrote: >> >>> Dear Address-Policy WG, >>> (cc'ing the EIX wg due to "this is where the proposal came from") >>> >>> after a very lifely debate in the early stages of this proposal, you >>> have been VERY quiet in this review phase. >>> >>> Specifically, *no* comments have been voiced, and this is not enough >>> for the proposal to go anywhere - so unless I see a few more comments >>> really soon now, we'll have to extend the review phase. >>> >>> Please let us know whether this version 3.0 of the proposal is what >>> you want to see become policy, or whether you oppose it. If you oppose >>> it, please make clear whether you oppose the general idea or just >>> specific aspects of the proposal as written now. >>> >>> thanks, >>> >>> Gert Doering, >>> APWG chair >>> >>> >>> On Tue, Mar 06, 2012 at 04:41:23PM +0100, Emilio Madaio wrote: >>>> >>>> Dear Colleagues, >>>> >>>> The text of RIPE Policy Proposal 2011-05, "Safeguarding future IXPs >>>> with IPv4 space", has been revised based on the community feedback >>>> received on the mailing list. We have published the new version >>>> (version 3.0) today. >>>> >>>> Highlights of the changes in version 3.0 are: >>>> >>>> -a new punctuation is used in the first bullet point of the proposed >>>> section 5.6.2 >>>> >>>> >>>> As per RIPE document ripe-500, "Policy Development Process in RIPE", >>>> the suggested change was not considered significant to require a new >>>> Discussion Phase. Hence the proposal moves to the Review Phase of the >>>> RIPE Policy Development Process. >>>> >>>> The draft document for the proposal has been published. The impact >>>> analysis that was conducted for this proposal has also been published >>>> >>>> >>>> You can find the full proposal and impact analysis at: >>>> >>>> http://www.ripe.net/ripe/policies/proposals/2011-05 >>>> >>>> and the draft document at: >>>> >>>> http://www.ripe.net/ripe/policies/proposals/2011-05/draft >>>> >>>> >>>> We encourage you to read the draft document text and send any comments >>>> to address-policy-wg at ripe.net before 3 April 2011. >>>> >>>> Regards >>>> >>>> Emilio Madaio >>>> Policy Development Officer >>>> RIPE NCC >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> Gert Doering >>> -- NetMaster >>> -- >>> 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 >>> >> >> >> >> This email is from Equinix Europe Limited or one of its associated/subsidiary companies. This email, and any files transmitted with it, contains information which is confidential, may be legally privileged and is solely for the use of the intended recipient. If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete this email immediately. Equinix Europe Limited. Registered Office: Quadrant House, 4 Thomas More Square, London E1W 1YW. Registered in England and Wales, No. 6293383. >> > From florian.hibler at euro-transit.net Fri Mar 30 09:41:01 2012 From: florian.hibler at euro-transit.net (Florian Hibler - EuroTransit GmbH) Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2012 09:41:01 +0200 Subject: [address-policy-wg] [eix-wg] 2011-05 New Draft Document Published (Safeguarding future IXPs with IPv4 space) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <31C0727C-31A2-45E9-91B6-B7FF078C3945@euro-transit.net> Hi everyone, I support this policy as well. Same objections as Remco on this topic. Have a nice day/weekend! Best regards, Florian EuroTransit GmbH global IP transit and carrier services Chief Technical Officer Alsterufer 30, D-20354 Hamburg fon: +49 40 41354058 fax: +49 40 41354893 E-Mail: florian.hibler at euro-transit.net Internet: http://www.euro-transit.net EuroTransit GmbH CEO: Andy Fischer Commercial Registry: Amtsgericht Hamburg HRB 107158 VAT Number: DE219346766 Registered Office: Hamburg, Germany Notice: This transmittal and/or attachments may be privileged or confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that you have received this transmittal in error; any review, dissemination, or copying is strictly prohibited. If you received this transmittal in error, please notify us immediately by reply and immediately delete this message and all its attachments. Thank you. On Mar 29, 2012, at 3:47 PM, Remco Van Mook wrote: > > I support this policy. Reserving the space has no significant impact on > IPv4 runout globally but will enable future exchange platforms to be > established and existing ones to expand, which is vital for the future > growth of the Internet. > > Remco van Mook > Director of Interconnection, EMEA > > remco.vanmook at eu.equinix.com > +31 61 135 6365 MOB > > EQUINIX > 51-53 Great Marlborough Street > London, W1F 7JT, United Kingdom > > > > > > > On 29-03-12 13:21, "Gert Doering" wrote: > >> Dear Address-Policy WG, >> (cc'ing the EIX wg due to "this is where the proposal came from") >> >> after a very lifely debate in the early stages of this proposal, you >> have been VERY quiet in this review phase. >> >> Specifically, *no* comments have been voiced, and this is not enough >> for the proposal to go anywhere - so unless I see a few more comments >> really soon now, we'll have to extend the review phase. >> >> Please let us know whether this version 3.0 of the proposal is what >> you want to see become policy, or whether you oppose it. If you oppose >> it, please make clear whether you oppose the general idea or just >> specific aspects of the proposal as written now. >> >> thanks, >> >> Gert Doering, >> APWG chair >> >> >> On Tue, Mar 06, 2012 at 04:41:23PM +0100, Emilio Madaio wrote: >>> >>> Dear Colleagues, >>> >>> The text of RIPE Policy Proposal 2011-05, "Safeguarding future IXPs >>> with IPv4 space", has been revised based on the community feedback >>> received on the mailing list. We have published the new version >>> (version 3.0) today. >>> >>> Highlights of the changes in version 3.0 are: >>> >>> -a new punctuation is used in the first bullet point of the proposed >>> section 5.6.2 >>> >>> >>> As per RIPE document ripe-500, "Policy Development Process in RIPE", >>> the suggested change was not considered significant to require a new >>> Discussion Phase. Hence the proposal moves to the Review Phase of the >>> RIPE Policy Development Process. >>> >>> The draft document for the proposal has been published. The impact >>> analysis that was conducted for this proposal has also been published >>> >>> >>> You can find the full proposal and impact analysis at: >>> >>> http://www.ripe.net/ripe/policies/proposals/2011-05 >>> >>> and the draft document at: >>> >>> http://www.ripe.net/ripe/policies/proposals/2011-05/draft >>> >>> >>> We encourage you to read the draft document text and send any comments >>> to address-policy-wg at ripe.net before 3 April 2011. >>> >>> Regards >>> >>> Emilio Madaio >>> Policy Development Officer >>> RIPE NCC >>> >>> >> >> >> Gert Doering >> -- NetMaster >> -- >> 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 >> > > > > This email is from Equinix Europe Limited or one of its associated/subsidiary companies. This email, and any files transmitted with it, contains information which is confidential, may be legally privileged and is solely for the use of the intended recipient. If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete this email immediately. Equinix Europe Limited. Registered Office: Quadrant House, 4 Thomas More Square, London E1W 1YW. Registered in England and Wales, No. 6293383. > From paul at prtsystems.ltd.uk Fri Mar 30 09:55:48 2012 From: paul at prtsystems.ltd.uk (Paul Thornton) Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2012 08:55:48 +0100 Subject: [address-policy-wg] [eix-wg] 2011-05 New Draft Document Published (Safeguarding future IXPs with IPv4 space) In-Reply-To: <20120329112104.GA72789@Space.Net> References: <1331048500.30490@mobil.space.net> <20120329112104.GA72789@Space.Net> Message-ID: <4F756704.1060307@prtsystems.ltd.uk> > On Tue, Mar 06, 2012 at 04:41:23PM +0100, Emilio Madaio wrote: >> >> Dear Colleagues, >> >> The text of RIPE Policy Proposal 2011-05, "Safeguarding future IXPs >> with IPv4 space", has been revised based on the community feedback >> received on the mailing list. We have published the new version >> (version 3.0) today. I support this policy; it is crucial to ensure that new IXPs can be established in the future. Regards, Paul. -- Paul Thornton Director, PRT Systems Ltd. From andy at nosignal.org Fri Mar 30 22:50:14 2012 From: andy at nosignal.org (Andy Davidson) Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2012 21:50:14 +0100 Subject: [address-policy-wg] [eix-wg] 2011-05 New Draft Document Published (Safeguarding future IXPs with IPv4 space) In-Reply-To: <4F761A42.9020206@de-cix.net> References: <1331048500.30490@mobil.space.net> <20120329112104.GA72789@Space.Net> <4F761A42.9020206@de-cix.net> Message-ID: <33218D4D-FF31-4591-96EE-FE04E61A0312@nosignal.org> On 30 Mar 2012, at 21:40, Arnold Nipper wrote: > perhaps the obligatory "I support this proposal" only happened on the Euro-IX mailing list, but I'm pretty sure I've seen these _somewhere_. Hi, Arnold Nope, there was lots on ap-wg too (the correct place for policy development) -- but in any case, I appreciated the renewed support during the Review Phase - thank you again. Andy From job at instituut.net Fri Mar 30 23:06:29 2012 From: job at instituut.net (Job Snijders) Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2012 23:06:29 +0200 Subject: [address-policy-wg] 2011-05 New Draft Document Published (Safeguarding future IXPs with IPv4 space) In-Reply-To: <20120329112104.GA72789@Space.Net> References: <1331048500.30490@mobil.space.net> <20120329112104.GA72789@Space.Net> Message-ID: <065C4DAA-231C-43E6-B054-C9686777665A@instituut.net> Dear All, On 29 mrt. 2012, at 13:21, Gert Doering wrote: > Please let us know whether this version 3.0 of the proposal is what > you want to see become policy, or whether you oppose it. I'd like 2011-05 to become policy. Kind regards, Job From alex at leefmann.com Sat Mar 31 00:02:34 2012 From: alex at leefmann.com (Alexander Leefmann) Date: Sat, 31 Mar 2012 00:02:34 +0200 Subject: [address-policy-wg] 2011-05 New Draft Document Published (Safeguarding future IXPs with IPv4 space) In-Reply-To: <065C4DAA-231C-43E6-B054-C9686777665A@instituut.net> References: <1331048500.30490@mobil.space.net> <20120329112104.GA72789@Space.Net> <065C4DAA-231C-43E6-B054-C9686777665A@instituut.net> Message-ID: <24E14DE1-891B-4656-9707-A3B555474A02@leefmann.com> Hi all, >> Please let us know whether this version 3.0 of the proposal is what >> you want to see become policy, or whether you oppose it. I would like to show my support for 2011-05. This proposal should become a policy from my point of view -- Alex -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 495 bytes Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail URL: From arnold.nipper at de-cix.net Fri Mar 30 22:40:34 2012 From: arnold.nipper at de-cix.net (Arnold Nipper) Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2012 22:40:34 +0200 Subject: [address-policy-wg] [eix-wg] 2011-05 New Draft Document Published (Safeguarding future IXPs with IPv4 space) In-Reply-To: <20120329112104.GA72789@Space.Net> References: <1331048500.30490@mobil.space.net> <20120329112104.GA72789@Space.Net> Message-ID: <4F761A42.9020206@de-cix.net> On 29.03.2012 13:21, Gert Doering wrote: > Dear Address-Policy WG, > (cc'ing the EIX wg due to "this is where the proposal came from") > > after a very lifely debate in the early stages of this proposal, you > have been VERY quiet in this review phase. > > Specifically, *no* comments have been voiced, and this is not enough > for the proposal to go anywhere - so unless I see a few more comments > really soon now, we'll have to extend the review phase. > perhaps the obligatory "I support this proposal" only happened on the Euro-IX mailing list, but I'm pretty sure I've seen these _somewhere_. Hence once again: safeguarding future IXPs with IPv4 space is an excellent idea. -- Arnold Nipper CTO/COO e-mail: arnold.nipper at de-cix.net DE-CIX Management GmbH mobile: +49 152 5371 7690 Lichtstr. 43i, 50825 Koeln phone: +49 69 1730 902 22 Geschaeftsfuehrer Harald A. Summa fax: +49 69 4056 2716 Registergericht AG Koeln HRB 51135 http://www.de-cix.net