From jeroen at unfix.org Fri Aug 25 12:22:39 2006 From: jeroen at unfix.org (Jeroen Massar) Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2006 12:22:39 +0200 Subject: [ipv6-wg] 2001:7f9::/32 still being announced even though the 'experiment' has finished 2 days ago? In-Reply-To: <7.0.0.16.2.20060724064257.02c0e270@apnic.net> References: <1153503349.5190.5.camel@firenze.zurich.ibm.com> <7.0.0.16.2.20060724064257.02c0e270@apnic.net> Message-ID: <44EECF6F.9050504@unfix.org> Geoff Huston wrote: > It would also be helpful if the details of the allocation were removed > from the RIPE NCC stats file > (ftp://ftp.ripe.net/pub/stats/ripencc/delegated-ripencc-latest/) > > "ripencc|ES|ipv6|2001:7f9::|32|20040719|allocated" > > as well as from the RIPE WHOIS database - after all its no longer > allocated space we are talking about here. [..] >> inet6num: 2001:07F9::/32 >> org: ORG-CA59-RIPE >> netname: CONSULINTEL-20040713 >> descr: Experimental Prefix >> ======================== >> Duration of assignment: >> ======================== >> Start date: 2004-07-19 >> End date: 2006-07-19 YEAH You can get free IPv6 address space from RIPE apparently. As the above has now become: 8<-------------------------------------------------------------- inet6num: 2001:07F9::/32 org: ORG-CA59-RIPE netname: CONSULINTEL-20040713 descr: Experimental Prefix ======================== Duration of assignment: ======================== Start date: 2004-07-19 End date: 2007-08-01 ======================== Details of Experiment: http://www.consulintel.euro6ix.org/prefix.htm ======================== country: ES admin-c: JPM128-RIPE --------------------------------------------------------------->8 For anybody wanting to dodge the LIR fees, clearly just request an experimental allocation under the premises that you do some experimental stuff, then you can use it for your commercial activities. Fortunately it is now sort of documented (see the new url which actually contains information). After 3+ years of not being so. It is of course funny to read "Some of those activities may behave disruptively at some moment". Funnily all the experiments mentioned there (without actual results which is something that the experimental request requires one to publish publically, that is also mail onto the mailinglist) have all been carried out already by several other entities who have been paying all those years for the prefix they used. To sum a few things up which are clearly skewed: They are testing with 'multihoming', but the doc states "the prefix is announced in a stable and aggregated way to the routing table", clearly that is not the thing that SHIM6 is supposed to do as SHIM6 is not touching the routing tables. Also multihoming implies multiple prefixes, not a single /32. Teredo is also out of scope for that document as Teredo has it's own IANA prefix. "Support to phase-out of the IPv6 experimental network - 6Bone - IPv6 Day http://www.ipv6day.org" Since when is webhosting an experiment? And why does that require a /32? "Research and development of Tutorial's contents and distributed demonstrations, providing tunnels for the participants when required - Number Hands-on Tutorials for RIRs: - ARIN XVII - RIPE 52 - AFRINIC" Two of these RIR's are outside the RIPE region, next to the fact that these RIR's usually have their own IPv6 connectivity, thus one doesn't need to use your own connectivity. As for documentation purposes there is 2001:db8::/32 I still wonders WHY there is such an experimental prefix, seeing that these 'projects' are clearly funded and very commercial and thus can also follow the normal guidelines, the same as every other company is doing. A single /48, received from their upstream provider is all they need. Clearly from the routing tables there is a single, US based, not even close to Spain, uplink, who are very capable of providing a free and gratuit /32. Thus I wonder why RIPE NCC is being bothered with this work. Apparently RIPE NCC doesn't mind doing it either, otherwise they would not have extended it. It's also a bit odd to see that the participants of this 'experiment' don't read the IPv6 mailinglist, they don't seem to have responded why they didn't stop announcing the prefix. Of course now they seemed to have received another free year of usage of the prefix. Greets, Jeroen -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 311 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: From david.kessens at nokia.com Thu Aug 31 05:04:24 2006 From: david.kessens at nokia.com (David Kessens) Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2006 20:04:24 -0700 Subject: [ipv6-wg] [info@arin.net: [arin-announce] NRPM version 2006.2 - New Policy Implementations] Message-ID: <20060831030424.GA30987@nokia.com> For your information. Please post followups regarding these policy changes to the address policy working group only. David Kessens --- ----- Forwarded message from Member Services ----- Delivered-To: arin-announce at lists.arin.net From: Member Services To: ARIN Announce , "'Public Policy Mailing List'" Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2006 19:22:07 -0400 Subject: [arin-announce] NRPM version 2006.2 - New Policy Implementations Reply-To: info at arin.net On 9 May 2006, the ARIN Board of Trustees, based on the recommendation of the Advisory Council and noting that the Internet Resource Policy Evaluation Process had been followed, adopted the following policy proposals: 2005-1: Provider-independent IPv6 Assignments for End Sites 2005-8: Proposal to amend ARIN IPv6 assignment and utilisation requirement 2005-9: 4-Byte AS Number These policy proposals have been incorporated into version 2006.2 of the ARIN Number Resource Policy Manual (NRPM) which is effective 30 August 2006. NRPM version 2006.2 supersedes previous versions. See Appendix A of the NRPM for information regarding changes to the manual. The NRPM can be found at: http://www.arin.net/policy/nrpm.html Appendix A can be found at: http://www.arin.net/policy/nrpm_changelog.html On 11 July 2006, the ARIN Board of Trustees added IPv6 Assignments to the ARIN fee schedule. The Board waived all but $500 of the IPv6 Initial Assignment fee through 31 December 2007. The fee schedule can be found at: http://www.arin.net/billing/fee_schedule.html For information about requesting an IPv6 assignment, please see the guidelines at: http://www.arin.net/registration/guidelines/ipv6_assignment.html Regards, Member Services American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN) _______________________________________________ ARIN-announce mailing list ARIN-announce at arin.net http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-announce "To Unsubscribe,<mailto:arin-announce-request at arin.net?subject=unsubscribe>." ----- End forwarded message ----- From president at ukraine.su Thu Aug 31 13:26:41 2006 From: president at ukraine.su (Max Tulyev) Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2006 11:26:41 +0000 Subject: [ipv6-wg] [info@arin.net: [arin-announce] NRPM version 2006.2 - New Policy Implementations] In-Reply-To: <20060831030424.GA30987@nokia.com> References: <20060831030424.GA30987@nokia.com> Message-ID: <44F6C771.7000204@ukraine.su> David Kessens wrote: > 2005-1: Provider-independent IPv6 Assignments for End Sites YES!!! They really did it? -- WBR, Max Tulyev (MT6561-RIPE, 2:463/253 at FIDO) From Michael.Dillon at btradianz.com Thu Aug 31 11:16:24 2006 From: Michael.Dillon at btradianz.com (Michael.Dillon at btradianz.com) Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2006 10:16:24 +0100 Subject: [address-policy-wg] Re: [ipv6-wg] [info@arin.net: [arin-announce] NRPM version 2006.2 - New Policy Implementations] In-Reply-To: <44F6C771.7000204@ukraine.su> Message-ID: > > 2005-1: Provider-independent IPv6 Assignments for End Sites > They really did it? That's right. Look here for details: http://www.arin.net/policy/proposals/2005_1.html You can see that it took a while and it was discussed at many meetings. --Michael Dillon From Woeber at CC.UniVie.ac.at Thu Aug 31 11:26:04 2006 From: Woeber at CC.UniVie.ac.at (Wilfried Woeber, UniVie/ACOnet) Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2006 09:26:04 +0000 Subject: [address-policy-wg] Re: [ipv6-wg] [info@arin.net: [arin-announce] NRPM version 2006.2 - New Policy Implementations] In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <44F6AB2C.3000509@CC.UniVie.ac.at> [removed address policiy to avoid duplicates - fell free to include again] Michael.Dillon at btradianz.com wrote: >>>2005-1: Provider-independent IPv6 Assignments for End Sites > > >>They really did it? > > > That's right. Look here for details: > http://www.arin.net/policy/proposals/2005_1.html > You can see that it took a while and it was discussed at > many meetings. Michael, do you happen to have a pointer (NRPM?) where I can find out about the phrase "Qualify for an IPv4 assignment or allocation from ARIN under the IPv4 policy currently in effect" ? > --Michael Dillon Thanks, Wilfried. From Michael.Dillon at btradianz.com Thu Aug 31 17:25:28 2006 From: Michael.Dillon at btradianz.com (Michael.Dillon at btradianz.com) Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2006 16:25:28 +0100 Subject: [address-policy-wg] Re: [ipv6-wg] [info@arin.net: [arin-announce] NRPM version 2006.2 - New Policy Implementations] In-Reply-To: <44F6AB2C.3000509@CC.UniVie.ac.at> Message-ID: > do you happen to have a pointer (NRPM?) where I can find out about the phrase > "Qualify for an IPv4 assignment or allocation from ARIN under the IPv4 policy > currently in effect" ? It's all here http://www.arin.net/policy/nrpm.html#ipv4 in section 4.2.2. As I remember this was there to allow for new organizations who don't have IPv4 networks to qualify on the same terms as an organization who is already running IPv4. --Michael Dillon