[address-policy-wg] 2015-05 Discussion Period extended until 13 May 2016 (Last /8 Allocation Criteria Revision)

Hi Hans, good morning list,

I think there is no confusion.
section  5.3 https://www.ripe.net/publications/docs/ripe-649

[...]
5.3 Address Recycling
Any address space that is returned to the RIPE NCC will be covered by 
the same rules as the address space intended in section 5.1.
This section only applies to address space that is returned to the RIPE 
NCC and that will not be returned to the IANA but re-issued by the RIPE 
NCC itself.
[...]

What is you understanding of "not be returned to the IANA but re-issued 
by the RIPE NCC itself" ?
In my understanding this does not talks about any space RECEIVED from 
IANA's Recovered IPv4 Pool
Recovered space reiceved from IANA comes from a global policy ratified 
by RIRs in September 2012
Maybe Andrea Cima can clarify RIPE NCC understanding about this, Andrea 
could you please give us RIPE NCC understading?

On the other hand it's easy to say that all the available pool can fall 
under the same policy in section 5.1. but it's clear that when last /8
was thought was to allow new entrants as well as existing LIRs develop 
IPv6 and keep fairness on the market.

Sorry for repeating myself but please note that policy 2014-04 
(https://www.ripe.net/participate/policies/proposals/2014-04) removed 
IPv6 requirement to obtain last /22 IPv4 allocation.
We have no IPv6 incentives but t-shirts!

Gert, Sander (Chairs): may I ask you to give me/us your opinion about 
absence of IPv6 incetives in our policies don't you think we are missing 
something?

regards
Riccardo


Il 20/04/2016 01:17, Hans Petter Holen ha scritto:
> On 16.04.2016 12.29, remco.vanmook at gmail.com wrote:
>> This confusion has been haunting the final /8 policy from day one - 
>> it was never about what to do with specifically 185/8, but what to do 
>> with all future allocations from the moment we needed to start 
>> allocating out of it. The policy text itself was never limited to a 
>> single /8, nor was that limitation any part of the discussion. 
>
> I looked up the policy proposal at
> https://www.ripe.net/participate/policies/proposals/2010-02
>
> " This proposal describes how the RIPE NCC should distribute IPv4 
> address space from the final /8 address block it receives from the IANA."
>
> Reading the rest of the proposal I fully understand the confusion and 
> find it hard to read your interpretation into the proposal.
>
> The updated policy after this proposal can be found in RIPE 509
> https://www.ripe.net/publications/docs/ripe-509#----use-of-last----for-pa-allocations
> * The following policies come into effect as soon as RIPE NCC is 
> required to make allocations from the final /8 it receives from the IANA.
>
> It does not discuss the event where RIPE NCC gets more address space 
> and could allocate from - which would strictly speaking not be 
> allocation from the last /8
>
> Tracing the policy text trough the versions - This text was first 
> removed between
> * RIPE 599 published on 20 December 2013 
> https://www.ripe.net/publications/docs/ripe-599#Use-last-for-PA-Allocationsand
> * RIPE 604 - published on 4 Feb 2014: 
> https://www.ripe.net/publications/docs/ripe-604
>
> Where the text was changed to:
>
>  1. The size of the allocation made will be exactly one /22.
>  2. The sum of all allocations made to a single LIR by the RIPE NCC
>     after the 14th of September 2012 is limited to a maximum of 1024
>     IPv4 addresses (a single /22 or the equivalent thereof).
>
> and no reference to the last /8.
>
> So I can easily understand the confusion.
>
> -- 
> Hans Petter Holen
> Mobile +47 45 06 60 54 |hph at oslo.net  |http://hph.oslo.net
>

-- 

Ing. Riccardo Gori
e-mail: rgori at wirem.net
Mobile:  +39 339 8925947
Mobile:  +34 602 009 437
Profile: https://it.linkedin.com/in/riccardo-gori-74201943

WIREM Fiber Revolution
Net-IT s.r.l.
Via Cesare Montanari, 2
47521 Cesena (FC)
Tel +39 0547 1955485
Fax +39 0547 1950285

--------------------------------------------------------------------
	CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
This message and its attachments are addressed solely to the persons
above and may contain confidential information. If you have received
the message in error, be informed that any use of the content hereof
is prohibited. Please return it immediately to the sender and delete
the message. Should you have any questions, please contact us by re-
plying to info at wirem.net
         Thank you
WIREM - Net-IT s.r.l.Via Cesare Montanari, 2 - 47521 Cesena (FC)
--------------------------------------------------------------------

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: </ripe/mail/archives/address-policy-wg/attachments/20160420/4811e1a1/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: logoWirem_4cm_conR.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 41774 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: </ripe/mail/archives/address-policy-wg/attachments/20160420/4811e1a1/attachment.jpg>