Dear apWG members, Hope this email finds you in good health. Please see my comments below, inline...
Le jeudi 27 janvier 2022, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via address-policy-wg < [email protected]> a écrit : > I'm not convinced that we should "today", provide IPv4 temporary > assignments, neither for conferences or experiments. > > Hi Jordi, Thanks for your email, brother! ...imho, maybe you should, if you consider a Tech conference where you try to teach your attendees how to build a transitional network based on the 464XLAT approach... ;-) > A conference can perfectly survive today with a single IPv4 public address > (or very few of them) from the ISP providing the link (even if running > BGP), using 464XLAT, so the participants get dual-stack in the same way > they are used to (private IPv4 addresses) and they also have global IPv6 > addresses. > ...sure, but please see the usecase presented above. > > This can be made with pure open source in a VM (if the provider doesn't > have a NAT64, it can be also in the VM, in addition to the CLAT support, > both using Jool, or other choices), etc. It is very well proven. > > Jordi, maybe this is a good case for a BCOP? :-/ > Now, regarding to experiments, I don't think we should keep doing IPv4 > experiments anymore and in the case it is really needed, I think it should > be possible to obtain the required addresses from the DCs where the > experiment will be co-located. > > ...i'm understanding the above as: *we* should not keep *supporting* IPv4 experiments anymore within this RIR. That's not a PoV i actually want to support, brother. > So, in short, I think if work is done, it makes more sense to send this > policy to "historic", at least deprecating the IPv4 part. > > ...imho, the RIPE-587 appears to be really useful... It covers almost all the situations which may occur in regard to temporary INRs. Sure, there are things/aspects to improve but i'm not sure to understand why the specific request for experiment shared by Randy can not be handled through it :-/ Please, someone to explain it to me :'-( ~°~ " For longer term projects and research purposes, the number resources may be issued on a temporary basis for a period of up to six calendar months, or one month longer than the expected life of the project/research/experiment, whichever is shorter. In the case where an End User requires number resources for research purposes, and where the research project details are made public upon registration of the number resources by the RIPE NCC, and where the End User commits to making public the results of their research project free of charge and free from disclosure constraints, then the requested number resources may be issued for a period of up to one calendar year. At the RIPE NCC's discretion renewal of the registration of the resources may be possible in exceptional circumstances on receipt of a new request that details continuation of the End User's requirements during the extended period. Should this request be denied by the RIPE NCC, an appeal may be made using the RIPE NCC Conflict Arbitration " https://www.ripe.net/publications/docs/ripe-587#:~:text=For%20longer%20term,NCC%20Conflict%20Arbitration ~•~ > I'm happy to work on that with a proposal, which seems to be very simple > to do. > > If there is interesting details to improve i'm also a taker. Given that it recalls me that i promised to work on the similar DPP (Draft Policy Proposal) within the AfriNIC's service region :-) Blessed new year 2022! ...one year less, under the era of LORD's Grace! Shalom, --sb. > Regards, > Jordi > @jordipalet > > > > El 27/1/22 15:45, "address-policy-wg en nombre de Angela Dall'Ara" < > [email protected] en nombre de [email protected]> > escribió: > > Hi Gert, Randy and Leo, > > Thank you for dedicating attention and time to ripe-587, as this > policy > became more topical since the IPv4 run-out. > > The requests for temporary assignments are always evaluated by the > RIPE > NCC on a case-by-case basis, and the current text of the policy > presents > some challenging aspects for the approval. > > Requests related to conferences and events generally include a > documentation that can easily show the utilisation of the addresses > and > the time of the assignment. Sometimes there is some time pressure due > to > last-minute submissions and there were few occasions when organisers > would have preferred more than the policy limit of two months, but > overall this part of the policy is sufficiently clear for the RIPE NCC. > > The requests for research and testing are posing challenges for the > approval against the required address utilisation (50%) stated in the > policy, when this cannot be reached due to the nature of the > research/experiment/test. > > We also receive requests where the temporary assignment purpose > appears > to be part of a standard network setup as the test/experiment/research > is motivated with the need of configuring and testing a protocol or a > feature that is new to the requester's network while being already > widely used in other ones. Many of these requests come from the > requester's interpretation of the policy. > > While the policy cannot cover all cases, a review of the technical > requirements, time limits and address utilisation would be beneficial > to > facilitate the RIPE NCC’s assessment of different requests. > > Kind regards, > Angela > > -- > Angela Dall'Ara > RIPE NCC Policy Officer > > > > On 26/01/2022 18:32, Gert Doering wrote: > > Hi, > > [...] > > > -- Best Regards ! __ baya.sylvain[AT cmNOG DOT cm]|<https://cmnog.cm/dokuwiki/Structure> Subscribe to Mailing List: <https://lists.cmnog.cm/mailman/listinfo/cmnog/> __ #LASAINTEBIBLE|#Romains15:33«Que LE #DIEU de #Paix soit avec vous tous! #Amen!» #MaPrière est que tu naisses de nouveau. #Chrétiennement «Comme une biche soupire après des courants d’eau, ainsi mon âme soupire après TOI, ô DIEU!»(#Psaumes42:2)
-- To unsubscribe from this mailing list, get a password reminder, or change your subscription options, please visit: https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/address-policy-wg
