Language Clarification in “IPv6 Addresses for Internet Root Servers In The RIPE Region”

This policy proposal has been accepted

The new RIPE Document is: ripe-636

2014-10

State:: Accepted

Publication date

20 Oct 2014

Affects

ripe-233

Draft document

Draft

Author

Andrea Cima [RIPE NCC]

Proposal Version

1.0 - 20 Oct 2014

All Versions

Accepted

11 Mar 2015

Working Group

Address Policy Working Group

Proposal type

Modify

Policy term

Indefinite

New RIPE Document

ripe-636

Summary of Proposal

The RIPE NCC service region relies on clear and consistent policies. During RIPE 67, Jan Žorž raised the issue that the use of the word “should” could create unwanted ambiguity in policy documents.

According to RFC 2119, the term “should” means that there may exist valid reasons to ignore a particular item. Correspondingly, the term “must” means that the definition is an absolute requirement of the specification.

The RIPE NCC has reviewed “IPv6 Address Space Policy For Root Servers” and found one occasion where “should” was used while the content and context indicate that “must” would be the appropriate term.

The finding was presented during RIPE 68 and it was agreed that the policy text should be clarified.

This proposal aims to clarify the language in the RIPE Document “IPv6 Addresses for Internet Root Servers In The RIPE Region”.

Policy Text

[The following text will update the RIPE Policy Document “IPv6 Addresses for Internet Root Servers In The RIPE Region”, if the proposal reaches consensus.]

a. Current policy text

“Abstract

It is not associated with the organisation(s) that operate the root server at a particular point in time and these organisations should not use the address space to provide any services not related to the root server.”

b. New policy text

“Abstract

It is not associated with the organisation(s) that operate the root server at a particular point in time and these organisations must not use the address space to provide any services not related to the root server.”

Rationale

a. Arguments supporting the proposal

Unambiguous understanding of the policy text
The policy text indicates that the IPv6 assignment is to be used solely for Internet root servers
To ensure consistency with the previous IPv4 policy for root servers, where it said “These prefixes must be used for the sole purpose of anycasting authoritative DNS servers for the stated TLD/ENUM […]”

b. Arguments opposing the proposal

The change will reduce the level of flexibility when interpreting the policy text

Impact Analysis

Note: In order to provide additional information related to the proposal, details of an impact analysis carried out by the RIPE NCC are documented below. The projections presented in this analysis are based on existing data and should be viewed only as an indication of the possible impact that the policy might have if the proposal is accepted and implemented.

A. RIPE NCC's Understanding of the Proposed Policy

It is the RIPE NCC's understanding that this proposal clarifies the language in the RIPE Document “IPv6 Addresses for Internet Root Servers In The RIPE Region" by removing unwanted ambiguity created by the term "should". The replacement with the term "must" confirms the policy's intention that this IPv6 address space cannot be used to provide any services that are not related to the root server.

This is in line with current RIPE NCC procedures.