Archived Policy Proposals

The policy proposals on this page have been archived. You can see at a glance if they were accepted and adopted by the RIPE community or withdrawn at any stage.

Name Status Proposal Number Working Group Date Archived
Extension of the Minimum Size for IPv6 Initial Allocation
2011-04 Address Policy Working Group May 2012

Summary: This policy proposal will permit the operators in the RIPE NCC service region to continue building successful Internet Exchange Point communities after IPv4 depletion.

Inter-RIR IPv4 Address Transfers
2012-01 Address Policy Working Group May 2012

Summary: This proposal modifies the eligibility for an organisation to receive an initial IPv6 allocation up to a /29. This is in order to enable small LIRs to deploy IPv6 using “IPv6 Rapid Deployment”, also known as “6rd”, as defined in RFC 5969 in a manner that does not encourage issuing a single /64 to end customers when an LIR has a minimum allocation of /32.

Removal of multihomed requirement for IPv6 PI
2011-02 Address Policy Working Group January 2012

Summary: This proposal intends to remove the multihome requirement necessary to receive PI IPv6 address space in the policy ripe-538, “IPv6 Address Allocation and Assignment Policy”.

Post-depletion IPv4 address recycling
2011-03 Address Policy Working Group October 2011

Summary: This proposal intends to define better how the address management of returned IPv4 address space will be performed when the final /8 policy comes into effect.

Global Policy for post exhaustion IPv4 allocation mechanisms by the IANA
2011-01 Address Policy Working Group October 2011

Summary: This proposal describes the process that IANA will follow to allocate IPv4 resources to Regional Internet Registries (RIRs) after the central pool of addresses is exhausted.

The processes for how IPv4 space may be placed in the IANA Recovered IPv4 Pool is out of the scope of this proposal.

PI Assignment Size
2006-05 Address Policy Working Group October 2011

Summary: This proposal suggests to have the minimum assignment size for PI assignments to be a /24 when routing is a major issue for a multihoming End User.

Temporary Internet Number Assignment Policies
2010-01 Address Policy Working Group August 2011

Summary: This proposal expands the RIPE NCC's ability to assign number resources for temporary purposes and allows the RIPE NCC to reserve pools of IP addresses and Autonomous System (AS) Numbers, which can be used by the RIPE NCC to make temporary direct assignments to End Users.

Initial Certification Policy in the RIPE NCC Service Region
2008-08 Address Policy Working Group July 2011

Summary: This proposal lays out guidelines for how LIRs can receive Resource Public Key Infrastructure (RPKI) certificates over their IP Resources and how these certificates should be maintained.

Reason for withdrawal: After carefully following the discussion in the Concluding Phase of the Policy Development Process, the proposer is of the opinion that consensus on this proposal is not possible within the RIPE community. As a consequence, the proposer has decided to withdraw the proposal.

Abuse contact information
2010-08 Anti-Abuse Working Group May 2011

Summary: This is a proposal to introduce a mandatory reference to irt objects in the inetnum, inet6num and aut-num objects in the RIPE Database. It provides a more accurate and efficient way for abuse reports to reach the correct network contact and helps reporting institutions to find the correct abuse contact information more easily.

Reason for withdrawal: A task force is working to solve the implementation issues pointed out by the proposal discussion. The possible policy consequences will be considered with a new proposal in the future.

Global Policy for IPv4 Allocation by the IANA Post Exhaustion
2010-05 Address Policy Working Group March 2011

Summary: This is a proposal to create a policy allowing for the allocation of IPv4 address space after the depletion of the IANA IPv4 address pool.

Reason for withdrawal: It was agreed with the proposer that the lack of community feedback and the impossibility of the proposal becoming globally accepted due to recent developments in the global PDP at the time were sufficient reasons to have it withdrawn.