[address-policy-wg] 2014-04 New Draft Document and Impact Analysis Published (Relaxing IPv6 Requirement for Receiving Space from the Final /8)

On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 9:10 PM, Nick Hilliard <nick at inex.ie> wrote:

> On 25/08/2014 19:47, Gert Doering wrote:
> > while I can understand that beaches and drinks are more attractive than
> > policy work, we have a proposal here that needs a bit of caring -
> > this one is in Review Phase until Friday, and has received exactly one
> > comment yet (strong support).  I could use a *bit* more feedback here...
>

Whoops, sorry about that!

Beach-and-drink time was over a month ago!


>
> tl;dr: don't support as-is, but could be convinced
>
> --
>
> I support the idea as it's a bugfix policy proposal, but the wording is
> need to be improved.  At the moment, it ties the policy to the idea of the
> RIPE NCC being the routing police.  Probably this isn't the intention.
>

I think you're right about that.


>
> It may be better to consider alternative wording, e.g.
>
> > An allocation will only be made to a LIR if the LIR has already been
> > assigned or allocated an IPv6 address block from a RIR.
>
> Even better, remove the requirement completely as it's pointless.


I'm not convinced that it's a pointless requirement, but I concur that the
wording needs to be changed a bit before I feel comfortable with it.

As it is, however, I don't feel strongly either way about this part of the
policy, but a clearer policy is something I'll support. :)
-- 
Jan
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: </ripe/mail/archives/address-policy-wg/attachments/20140825/7803840d/attachment.html>