This archive is retained to ensure existing URLs remain functional. It will not contain any emails sent to this mailing list after July 1, 2024. For all messages, including those sent before and after this date, please visit the new location of the archive at https://mailman.ripe.net/archives/list/address-policy-wg@ripe.net/
[address-policy-wg] Update on ALLOCATED PI/UNSPECIFIED
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Update on ALLOCATED PI/UNSPECIFIED
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Update on ALLOCATED PI/UNSPECIFIED
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Gert Doering
gert at space.net
Thu Aug 4 13:37:10 CEST 2016
Hi, On Thu, Aug 04, 2016 at 08:12:56PM +0900, Randy Bush wrote: > i am perennially confused by the different colors of integers. as you > know, i prefer magenta and comic sans. Not all prefixes belong to Rüdiger, so, magenta is out... > ingrid/ncc can you explain in terms an antique router geek can > understand what the actual pragmatic effect would be on these PI/PA > holders? does it alter holders' rights? costs? processes? ... Right now, there are two different shades of "PI colour" - "real PI" and "not really real PI". The first shade has the full obligations and protection of 2007-01 - namely, a contractual relationship (via a sponsoring LIR) with the NCC that clearly identifies who has "rights" to that prefix. The other shade is also labeled "PI", but whether or not contracts exist, and who is the legitimate holder, is less well defined. This proposal aims to unify all PI into one colour, which I think is good for the resource holders (no uncertainity) - but there is potential fallout, like "we've been doing IPv4 PI assignments all the years, and nobody bothered!" - which technically could be done from "ALLOCATED UNSPECIFIED" blocks, but was always outside RIPE policies - and if these are now properly labeled and tagged, certain business practices might no longer be possible. Also, it might lead to deaggs (Markus' case) where a /14 that was originally "in one LIR" would be "3x /16, plus some smaller fragments in the LIR" and "lots of /24 PI managed by the NCC" now - so the /14 won't get a ROA, and he'll have to announce more-specifics. There is no "truly nice" solution to this. It's swampy space that will smell when you try to clean it up (but some people insist that parts of that swamp is *theirs* and want all the titles that come with that...). So, to answer your question: for those "swampy PI", it would alter their rights (contracts according to 2007-01), costs (50 EUR/year), processes (sponsoring LIR, instead of "no clear process"). Quite some change. Gert Doering -- APWG chair -- have you enabled IPv6 on something today...? SpaceNet AG Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann D-80807 Muenchen HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen) Tel: +49 (0)89/32356-444 USt-IdNr.: DE813185279 -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 819 bytes Desc: not available URL: </ripe/mail/archives/address-policy-wg/attachments/20160804/d71048aa/attachment.sig>
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Update on ALLOCATED PI/UNSPECIFIED
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Update on ALLOCATED PI/UNSPECIFIED
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]