[address-policy-wg] IPv4 PA assignments policy change draft proposal

Hi,

On Sun, May 15, 2022 at 04:53:59PM +0200, James Kennedy wrote:
> > assignment-to-self would still be possible, just
> > no more mandatory.
> 
> Correct, I believe that's the aim of this proposal. LIRs will no
> longer be obliged by policy to register all their infrastructure
> assignments in the RIPE Database.

Technically, they have never been obliged to register this in fine
detail ever.  Though, some do, and some do not.  Setting aside a /24
and marking this as "infrastructure" has always been good enough
(modulo AW and Infra-AW and all the fine print).

Those that register high amounts of detail even though they are not
required to do so - what makes you think that they would stop if they
are no longer required to do so?


In other words: I still find it totally unclear what the underlying
problem statement of this proposal is.  Your attempt to do so by 
referring to "large amount of objects put into the DB for infrastructure"
didn't make it any clearer.

[..]
> > This sounds more like a task for the training department or for the ARCs
> > than for a policy change to me.
> 
> The training department and ARCs help enforce policy.

Help enforce, and plain help LIRs to better understand what is expected
from them, even if not written down.  The DBTF seems to want "less detailed
infrastructure objects", though I fail the reasoning for that - but if 
that is the goal, it could be done by adding the expected level of detail
to the LIR training.

>  Current policy
> has resulted in considerable PA assignment registration
> inconsistencies by LIRs (see
> https://www.ripe.net/publications/docs/ripe-767#612).

Ignoring for the moment that not all LIRs are identical, that still sounds 
to me like "training and ARC" - and why would the proposal being discussed
here have an effekt on these inconsistencies?

[..]
> > Are we no longer aiming for accurate registration, because the DBTF finds
> > that too resource consuming?  I'm not sure I understand that line of
> > argument.
> 
> I've not seen that being made as an argument by anyone. Data accuracy
> is very high on the list of Data Management Principles:

Yes.  So what is the intended benefit when aiming for a reduction of registry 
entries?

Gert Doering
        -- NetMaster
-- 
have you enabled IPv6 on something today...?

SpaceNet AG                      Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard, Michael Emmer
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: 833 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: </ripe/mail/archives/address-policy-wg/attachments/20220515/4983adea/attachment.sig>