[address-policy-wg] Feedback needed for 2018-03 (Fixing Outdated Information in the IPv4 Policy)

Thanks Andrea, you're correct, I mixed up Allocated-PI and Assigned-PI.
I support the 2018-03 and attempts to clarify the many status categories.

Regards,
Mike


-----Original Message-----
From: Andrea Cima [mailto:andrea at ripe.net] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 17, 2018 8:30 AM
To: Mike Burns <mike at iptrading.com>; address-policy-wg at ripe.net
Subject: Re: [address-policy-wg] Feedback needed for 2018-03 (Fixing Outdated Information in the IPv4 Policy)


Hi Mike,

Thank you for your question.

During an Inter-RIR transfer we have never been asked to register resources with the status ALLOCATED PI. This is due to the fact that neither ARIN nor APNIC are using the status ALLOCATED PI in their databases. Furthermore holders of Legacy resources being transferred to the RIPE region can choose to retain to the Legacy status or convert the status to ALLOCATED PA or ASSIGNED PI.

The RIPE Community decided that the status ALLOCATED PI is outdated and conflicts with current policies in regards to the registration requirements for independent resources. For this reason the RIPE NCC has been running a project converting, in cooperation with resource holders, all IPv4 ranges with status ALLOCATED PI to either ALLOCATED PA or ASSIGNED PI. As a consequence the RIPE Database does not contain anymore inetnum objects with the status ALLOCATED PI.

This is one of the reasons why this proposal suggests removing such outdated information from the IPv4 policy.

I hope this clarifies your question.

Do you have an opinion about this policy proposal?

Thank you again and best regards,

Andrea Cima

RIPE NCC



On 16/07/2018 16:48, Mike Burns wrote:
> c. The RIPE NCC, in cooperation with the receiving party, and in compliance with RIPE Policies, will determine the status that the resources to be transferred will receive once they are registered in the RIPE Registry.
>
> Hi Andrea,
>
> Per the section of the Ripe policy regarding inter-regional transfers extracted above, we have seen recipients of inter-regional transfers into RIPE choose to designate their received space as Allocated-PI. Is this still allowed?
>
> The proposal under consideration obsoletes the designation Allocated-PI.
>
> Regards,
> Mike Burns
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: address-policy-wg [mailto:address-policy-wg-bounces at ripe.net] On 
> Behalf Of Andrea Cima
> Sent: Monday, July 16, 2018 10:30 AM
> To: address-policy-wg at ripe.net
> Subject: [address-policy-wg] Feedback needed for 2018-03 (Fixing 
> Outdated Information in the IPv4 Policy)
>
> Dear All,
>
> Policy proposal 2018-03 aims at fixing outdated information in IPv4 Policy, like outdated references or values of inetnum objects in the RIPE Database.
>
> While I am aware this is not the most exciting of the current policy proposals, it is important to keep the content of the IPv4 policy up-to-date.
> The review phase for this proposed policy change will end this week, and in order to proceed with the PDP this proposal needs your input, whether you support or oppose the changes.
>
> You can find the full proposal here:
> https://www.ripe.net/participate/policies/proposals/2018-03
>
> Thank you in advance for your support and best regards,
>
> Andrea Cima
>
> RIPE NCC
>
>
>
>