From ebais at a2b-internet.com Mon Oct 1 17:51:19 2018 From: ebais at a2b-internet.com (Erik Bais) Date: Mon, 1 Oct 2018 15:51:19 +0000 Subject: [address-policy-wg] Draft Agenda RIPE77 - Address Policy Message-ID: Hi APWG folks, Below you can find a draft for the RIPE address policy WG meeting's agenda, which will take place in Amsterdam in the side-room in the following time slots: Wednesday, Oct 17, 09:00 - 10:30 Wednesday, Oct 17, 11:00 - 12:30 If you have anything else you want to see on the agenda, or if we need to change anything, please let us know. Regards, Gert D?ring & Erik Bais, APWG chairs ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Wednesday, 09:00-10:30 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- A. Administrative Matters (welcome, thanking the scribe, approving the minutes, etc.) B. Update on 2018 - 04 - PDP Clarification to the WG. ( discussion was done on RIPE Discussion list ) C. Current Policy Topics - Marco Schmidt, NCC PDO - 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 RIPE 76 - brief overview of new proposals (if any) D. IPv4 end-game and afterlife - Andrea Cima, RIPE NCC (+ discussion with the group) E. Country codes in the extended delegated statistics and RIPE DB. by Ingrid Wijte, RIPE NCC ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Wednesday, 11:00-12:30 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Welcome back F. Discussion of open policy proposals 2018-02 Assignment Clarification in IPv6 Policy Jordi Palet Martinez Y. Open Policy Hour The Open Policy Hour 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 mschmidt at ripe.net Tue Oct 2 15:01:15 2018 From: mschmidt at ripe.net (Marco Schmidt) Date: Tue, 02 Oct 2018 15:01:15 +0200 Subject: [address-policy-wg] RIPE 76 Address Policy WG Draft Minutes Message-ID: Dear colleagues, The draft minutes from the Address Policy Working Group sessions at RIPE 76 have now been published: https://www.ripe.net/participate/ripe/wg/ap/minutes/ripe-76-address-policy-working-group-minutes Please let us know of any corrections or amendments. Kind regards, Marco Schmidt Policy Officer RIPE NCC Sent via RIPE Forum -- https://www.ripe.net/participate/mail/forum From mschmidt at ripe.net Wed Oct 3 09:41:32 2018 From: mschmidt at ripe.net (Marco Schmidt) Date: Wed, 03 Oct 2018 09:41:32 +0200 Subject: [address-policy-wg] 2018-02 Discussion Phase Extended (Assignment Clarification in IPv6 Policy) Message-ID: Dear colleagues, RIPE Policy proposal 2018-02, "Assignment Clarification in IPv6 Policy" is still available for discussion. This proposal aims to clarify the definition of "Assign" in the IPv6 Policy (ripe-707, section 2.6). You can find the full proposal at: https://www.ripe.net/participate/policies/proposals/2018-02 As per the RIPE Policy Development Process (PDP), the purpose of this three week extended Discussion Phase is to discuss the proposal and provide feedback to the proposer. At the end of the Discussion Phase, the proposer, with the agreement of the WG Chairs, will decide how to proceed with the proposal. We encourage you to review this proposal and send your comments to before 25 October 2018. Regards, Marco Schmidt Policy Officer RIPE NCC Sent via RIPE Forum -- https://www.ripe.net/participate/mail/forum From jordi.palet at consulintel.es Wed Oct 17 12:08:49 2018 From: jordi.palet at consulintel.es (JORDI PALET MARTINEZ) Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2018 12:08:49 +0200 Subject: [address-policy-wg] What we want to be acceptable in IPv4 PI and IPv6 PI? Message-ID: Hi all, Trying to look into my presentation today from a higher-level perspective ... What is the expected usage of IPv4 and IPv6 PI? It should be the same or different? Do we want to use IPv6 PI as an entry point for people, without any restrictions, to start providing services and then they can grow up to become an LIR? That means that an IPv6 PI can be used to provide hosting/housing services? What about broadband services to end-users? Peter, maybe you have a different perspective about how to approach this. Can you share it in the list? Regards, Jordi ********************************************** IPv4 is over Are you ready for the new Internet ? http://www.consulintel.es The IPv6 Company This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or confidential. The information is intended to be for the exclusive use of the individual(s) named above and further non-explicilty authorized disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited and will be considered a criminal offense. If you are not the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited, will be considered a criminal offense, so you must reply to the original sender to inform about this communication and delete it. From gert at space.net Wed Oct 17 15:12:15 2018 From: gert at space.net (Gert Doering) Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2018 15:12:15 +0200 Subject: [address-policy-wg] What we want to be acceptable in IPv4 PI and IPv6 PI? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20181017131215.GY11393@Space.Net> Hi, On Wed, Oct 17, 2018 at 12:08:49PM +0200, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via address-policy-wg wrote: > Trying to look into my presentation today from a higher-level perspective ... > > What is the expected usage of IPv4 and IPv6 PI? We should stop caring about IPv4 PI, as that is long gone. So the focus needs to be "what is an IPv6 PI policy that is useful for the RIPE region". Wether or not this is the same as what we had for IPv4 in the past is only of historic relevance. Gert Doering -- APWG chair -- have you enabled IPv6 on something today...? SpaceNet AG Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard, Michael Emmer Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann D-80807 Muenchen HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen) Tel: +49 (0)89/32356-444 USt-IdNr.: DE813185279 -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 833 bytes Desc: not available URL: From randy at psg.com Wed Oct 17 16:24:15 2018 From: randy at psg.com (Randy Bush) Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2018 16:24:15 +0200 Subject: [address-policy-wg] What we want to be acceptable in IPv4 PI and IPv6 PI? In-Reply-To: <20181017131215.GY11393@Space.Net> References: <20181017131215.GY11393@Space.Net> Message-ID: > So the focus needs to be "what is an IPv6 PI policy that is useful for > the RIPE region". > > Wether or not this is the same as what we had for IPv4 in the past is > only of historic relevance. after all, as humans have proven time and time again, we have nothing to learn from history :) randy From gert at space.net Wed Oct 17 16:28:33 2018 From: gert at space.net (Gert Doering) Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2018 16:28:33 +0200 Subject: [address-policy-wg] What we want to be acceptable in IPv4 PI and IPv6 PI? In-Reply-To: References: <20181017131215.GY11393@Space.Net> Message-ID: <20181017142833.GA11393@Space.Net> Hi, On Wed, Oct 17, 2018 at 04:24:15PM +0200, Randy Bush wrote: > > So the focus needs to be "what is an IPv6 PI policy that is useful for > > the RIPE region". > > > > Wether or not this is the same as what we had for IPv4 in the past is > > only of historic relevance. > > after all, as humans have proven time and time again, we have nothing > to learn from history :) This is not what I said and not what I meant. I just see the attempt to keep IPv6 PI policy in sync with something that does no longer exist as a waste of our collective time. Looking at possible ways IPv4 PI was and is used and using that as additional data to make good IPv6 PI policy is, of course, useful :-) Gert Doering -- have you enabled IPv6 on something today...? SpaceNet AG Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard, Michael Emmer Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann D-80807 Muenchen HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen) Tel: +49 (0)89/32356-444 USt-IdNr.: DE813185279 -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 833 bytes Desc: not available URL: From aleksbulgakov at gmail.com Wed Oct 17 17:12:13 2018 From: aleksbulgakov at gmail.com (Aleksey Bulgakov) Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2018 18:12:13 +0300 Subject: [address-policy-wg] What we want to be acceptable in IPv4 PI and IPv6 PI? In-Reply-To: <20181017131215.GY11393@Space.Net> References: <20181017131215.GY11393@Space.Net> Message-ID: >We should stop caring about IPv4 PI, as that is long gone. And about IPv4 PA and stop to help RIPE to earn money. :) ??, 17 ???. 2018 ?., 16:12 Gert Doering : > Hi, > > On Wed, Oct 17, 2018 at 12:08:49PM +0200, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via > address-policy-wg wrote: > > Trying to look into my presentation today from a higher-level > perspective ... > > > > What is the expected usage of IPv4 and IPv6 PI? > > We should stop caring about IPv4 PI, as that is long gone. > > So the focus needs to be "what is an IPv6 PI policy that is useful for > the RIPE region". > > Wether or not this is the same as what we had for IPv4 in the past is > only of historic relevance. > > Gert Doering > -- APWG chair > -- > have you enabled IPv6 on something today...? > > SpaceNet AG Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard, Michael > Emmer > Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann > D-80807 Muenchen HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen) > Tel: +49 (0)89/32356-444 USt-IdNr.: DE813185279 > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ripedenis at yahoo.co.uk Thu Oct 18 00:20:31 2018 From: ripedenis at yahoo.co.uk (denis walker) Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2018 22:20:31 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [address-policy-wg] country code in ORGANISATION object References: <2013591592.9742354.1539814831923.ref@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <2013591592.9742354.1539814831923@mail.yahoo.com> Hi all During the questions after Ingrid's presentation about the meaning of country codes it was mentioned that both the ORGANISATION and INET(6)NUM objects had a "country:" attribute. The suggestion was that maybe the one in the ORGANISATION object could reflect a legal country and the resources could be user specific. I can't see any mention anywhere of a "country:" attribute in an ORGANISATION object. It might be useful if it had one especially for the current discussion in NCC Services about legal address. cheersdenis -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jaap at NLnetLabs.nl Thu Oct 18 07:47:25 2018 From: jaap at NLnetLabs.nl (Jaap Akkerhuis) Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2018 07:47:25 +0200 Subject: [address-policy-wg] country code in ORGANISATION object In-Reply-To: <2013591592.9742354.1539814831923@mail.yahoo.com> References: <2013591592.9742354.1539814831923.ref@mail.yahoo.com> <2013591592.9742354.1539814831923@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <201810180547.w9I5lPGv088099@bela.nlnetlabs.nl> > Hi all > During the questions after Ingrid's presentation about the meaning > of country codes it was mentioned that both the ORGANISATION and > INET(6)NUM objects had a "country:" attribute. The suggestion was > that maybe the one in the ORGANISATION object could reflect a legal > country ... Legal country? If you mean it that the ISO 3166 standard for country codes let me rmatk that this is, as most standards in the world, just a voluntary standard. One adheres to it or not. jaap From gert at space.net Sun Oct 21 19:40:22 2018 From: gert at space.net (Gert Doering) Date: Sun, 21 Oct 2018 19:40:22 +0200 Subject: [address-policy-wg] country code in ORGANISATION object In-Reply-To: <2013591592.9742354.1539814831923@mail.yahoo.com> References: <2013591592.9742354.1539814831923.ref@mail.yahoo.com> <2013591592.9742354.1539814831923@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20181021174022.GW11393@Space.Net> Hi, On Wed, Oct 17, 2018 at 10:20:31PM +0000, denis walker via address-policy-wg wrote: > During the questions after Ingrid's presentation about the meaning > of country codes it was mentioned that both the ORGANISATION and > INET(6)NUM objects had a "country:" attribute. The suggestion was > that maybe the one in the ORGANISATION object could reflect a legal > country and the resources could be user specific. I can't see any > mention anywhere of a "country:" attribute in an ORGANISATION object. Right. Thanks for pointing this out - I was sure it had one, but this turned out to be incorrect (and I neglected to send the correction to the list so far). > It might be useful if it had one especially for the current discussion > in NCC Services about legal address. Which WG do we want to have this discussion in? Is this more DB-ish, or more AP-ish? Gert Doering -- APWG chair -- have you enabled IPv6 on something today...? SpaceNet AG Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard, Michael Emmer Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann D-80807 Muenchen HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen) Tel: +49 (0)89/32356-444 USt-IdNr.: DE813185279 -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 833 bytes Desc: not available URL: From gert at space.net Sun Oct 21 19:43:29 2018 From: gert at space.net (Gert Doering) Date: Sun, 21 Oct 2018 19:43:29 +0200 Subject: [address-policy-wg] country code in ORGANISATION object In-Reply-To: <201810180547.w9I5lPGv088099@bela.nlnetlabs.nl> References: <2013591592.9742354.1539814831923.ref@mail.yahoo.com> <2013591592.9742354.1539814831923@mail.yahoo.com> <201810180547.w9I5lPGv088099@bela.nlnetlabs.nl> Message-ID: <20181021174329.GX11393@Space.Net> Hi, On Thu, Oct 18, 2018 at 07:47:25AM +0200, Jaap Akkerhuis wrote: > > During the questions after Ingrid's presentation about the meaning > > of country codes it was mentioned that both the ORGANISATION and > > INET(6)NUM objects had a "country:" attribute. The suggestion was > > that maybe the one in the ORGANISATION object could reflect a legal > > country ... > > Legal country? If you mean it that the ISO 3166 standard for country > codes let me rmatk that this is, as most standards in the world, > just a voluntary standard. One adheres to it or not. "legal country" in the sense of "this is the country where the legal address of the organization in question is" - while "country" in the inetnum object could be "the country where the (largest part of) the network is" or "where it should be found for geolocation purposes" or whatever people put in there... Gert Doering -- have you enabled IPv6 on something today...? SpaceNet AG Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard, Michael Emmer Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann D-80807 Muenchen HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen) Tel: +49 (0)89/32356-444 USt-IdNr.: DE813185279 -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 833 bytes Desc: not available URL: From nick at foobar.org Sun Oct 21 21:18:27 2018 From: nick at foobar.org (Nick Hilliard) Date: Sun, 21 Oct 2018 20:18:27 +0100 Subject: [address-policy-wg] country code in ORGANISATION object In-Reply-To: <20181021174022.GW11393@Space.Net> References: <2013591592.9742354.1539814831923.ref@mail.yahoo.com> <2013591592.9742354.1539814831923@mail.yahoo.com> <20181021174022.GW11393@Space.Net> Message-ID: <0f0066f3-ce21-9959-54d8-90d19db206fa@foobar.org> Gert Doering wrote on 21/10/2018 18:40: > Which WG do we want to have this discussion in? Is this more DB-ish, > or more AP-ish? DB-WG Nick From ripedenis at yahoo.co.uk Sun Oct 21 22:13:22 2018 From: ripedenis at yahoo.co.uk (denis walker) Date: Sun, 21 Oct 2018 20:13:22 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [address-policy-wg] country code in ORGANISATION object In-Reply-To: <20181021174022.GW11393@Space.Net> References: <2013591592.9742354.1539814831923.ref@mail.yahoo.com> <2013591592.9742354.1539814831923@mail.yahoo.com> <20181021174022.GW11393@Space.Net> Message-ID: <1087034664.20856827.1540152802069@mail.yahoo.com> Hi Gert The DB part is simply to add an attribute. The mechanics of that is pretty straight forward. The reason for adding it and it's strict definition and perhaps status as a 'fixed' attribute value are more address policy or services. cheersdenisco chair DB-WG From: Gert Doering To: denis walker Cc: "address-policy-wg at ripe.net" Sent: Sunday, 21 October 2018, 19:40 Subject: Re: [address-policy-wg] country code in ORGANISATION object Hi, On Wed, Oct 17, 2018 at 10:20:31PM +0000, denis walker via address-policy-wg wrote: > During the questions after Ingrid's presentation about the meaning > of country codes it was mentioned that both the ORGANISATION and > INET(6)NUM objects had a "country:" attribute. The suggestion was > that maybe the one in the ORGANISATION object could reflect a legal > country and the resources could be user specific. I can't see any > mention anywhere of a "country:" attribute in an ORGANISATION object. Right.? Thanks for pointing this out - I was sure it had one, but this turned out to be incorrect (and I neglected to send the correction to the list so far). > It might be useful if it had one especially for the current discussion > in NCC Services about legal address. Which WG do we want to have this discussion in?? Is this more DB-ish, or more AP-ish? Gert Doering ? ? ? ? -- APWG chair -- have you enabled IPv6 on something today...? SpaceNet AG? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard, Michael Emmer Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14? ? ? ? Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann D-80807 Muenchen? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen) Tel: +49 (0)89/32356-444? ? ? ? USt-IdNr.: DE813185279 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sander at steffann.nl Mon Oct 22 08:05:09 2018 From: sander at steffann.nl (Sander Steffann) Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2018 08:05:09 +0200 Subject: [address-policy-wg] country code in ORGANISATION object In-Reply-To: <1087034664.20856827.1540152802069@mail.yahoo.com> References: <2013591592.9742354.1539814831923.ref@mail.yahoo.com> <2013591592.9742354.1539814831923@mail.yahoo.com> <20181021174022.GW11393@Space.Net> <1087034664.20856827.1540152802069@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <858E526A-5131-4A02-8CC4-624FC714FFDE@steffann.nl> Hi Denis, > The DB part is simply to add an attribute. The mechanics of that is pretty straight forward. The reason for adding it and its strict definition and perhaps status as a 'fixed' attribute value are more address policy or services. I don't think it fits in APWG. It doesn't change the allocation/assignment policy, only the bookkeeping. I think this policy proposal belongs in DBWG. Cheers, Sander From jordi.palet at consulintel.es Mon Oct 29 17:41:13 2018 From: jordi.palet at consulintel.es (JORDI PALET MARTINEZ) Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2018 17:41:13 +0100 Subject: [address-policy-wg] proposed text for Assignment Clarification in IPv6 Policy (policy proposal 2018-02) Message-ID: <45863B73-1630-4487-A96F-3351777822E7@consulintel.es> Hi all, Unfortunately, I've not received inputs on my question about what we want to be allowed in IPv6 PI, but as I'm working on this in other regions, got inputs in another region, which I think I can translate to this text: ** 2.6. Assign To "assign" means to delegate address space to an ISP or End User, for exclusive use within the infrastructure they operate, as well as for interconnection purposes. The address space assignment is only for use by the original holder of said assignment, as well as for third-party devices, as long as they are operating within the original holder infrastructure. PI space will provide typically, a small number of subnets, so it is not intended or desired to use PI space for access networks or commercial hosting and it is strongly recommended instead, using PA space for such purposes. ** This allows us to be "liberal" on using PI for data centers, which I think is the main issue of my previous version (https://www.ripe.net/participate/policies/proposals/2018-02), and also allow what somebody said is a "garage ISP" (a small ISP or DC that can start with very small cost o PI, and grow later on to PA). This will also align us with the goal of facilitating IPv6 deployment. Opinions? Regards, Jordi ********************************************** IPv4 is over Are you ready for the new Internet ? http://www.theipv6company.com The IPv6 Company This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or confidential. The information is intended to be for the exclusive use of the individual(s) named above and further non-explicilty authorized disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited and will be considered a criminal offense. If you are not the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited, will be considered a criminal offense, so you must reply to the original sender to inform about this communication and delete it.