Dear colleagues, I very much support the direction of the proposal, and I would like to thank Tobias and Clara for their persistence.
Reading the impact analysis, it strikes me that there are two different categories of concern raised by the NCC: Implementation cost: Software, processes, documentation and training/exam material would need to be changed. If "We would have to change things and that costs money" becomes a sufficient argument against a proposed policy change we might as well stop doing them. Nothing in this line of reasoning tells me anything about the substance of the proposal, and the merits of it. I am also somewhat disappointed that the Executive board thought it fitting to advise revision in a single sentence without any stated reasoning - and I'm not going to dig through the board minutes to find the reasoning, if it exists. I would very much like to hear the board's reasoning; both for the comment itself and the way they decided to present it. Actual substance: There are I think 3 findings that this proposal will need to address before we can proceed. 1 - Transition mathematics. Existing /48 assignments sit in /46 reservations. The entire installed base is therefore impossible to extend in place to 'the next nibble' or a /44. With that, grow in place becomes a mandatory renumber-and-return exercise for everyone who wants additional space. 2 - The transfer gap. The return obligation only applies to the previous assignment - the new block can immediately be (partly) transferred. This creates the exact fragmentation this proposal seeks to avoid. 3 - Internal consistency. Proposed 2.6 permits conditional sub-assignment and the untouched text of article 7 still states that PI cannot be further sub-assigned, and the interaction with 7.2 would put an End User who later becomes a member/LIR themselves in automatic violation. On the NCC's enforcement dilemma: this is the permanent shape of every needs-based policy we've ever had, going back all the way to the original IPv4 policy. The same goes for the ambiguity of the term 'end site': I see that that will become a policy proposal in its own right and I'm very much looking forward to reading it - it is overdue by decades, in my opinion. Neither of these problems is introduced by this proposal, and I don't see why these arguments should be used as an implementation blocker. To summarise: I support the intent, but we should find language that addresses my points above. Those are the actual substance, not the training courses. Kind regards Remco > On 25 Aug 2026, at 14:56, Angela Dall'Ara <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Dear colleagues, > > > > Policy proposal 2024-01, "Revised IPv6 PI Assignment Policy", is now in the > Review Phase. > > > > The RIPE NCC has prepared an impact analysis on this proposal to support the > community’s discussion. > > > > You can find the proposal and impact analysis at: > > https://www.ripe.net/community/policies/proposals/2024-01/ > https://www.ripe.net/community/policies/proposals/2024-01/#impact-analysis > And the draft document at: > > https://www.ripe.net/community/policies/proposals/2024-01/draft/ > > > As per the RIPE Policy Development Process (PDP), the purpose of this > four-week Review Phase is to continue the discussion of the proposal taking > the impact analysis into consideration, and to review the full draft RIPE > Policy Document. > > > > At the end of the Review Phase, the Working Group (WG) Chairs will determine > whether the WG has reached rough consensus. > > > It is therefore important to provide your opinion, even if it is simply a > restatement of your input from the previous phase. > > > > We encourage you to read the proposal, impact analysis and draft document and > to send any comments to [email protected] before 23 September 2026. > > > Kind regards, > Angela Dall'Ara > Policy Officer > RIPE NCC > ----- > To unsubscribe from this mailing list or change your subscription options, > please visit: > https://mailman.ripe.net/mailman3/lists/address-policy-wg.ripe.net/ > As we have migrated to Mailman 3, you will need to create an account with the > email matching your subscription before you can change your settings. More > details at: https://www.ripe.net/membership/mail/mailman-3-migration/ ----- To unsubscribe from this mailing list or change your subscription options, please visit: https://mailman.ripe.net/mailman3/lists/address-policy-wg.ripe.net/ As we have migrated to Mailman 3, you will need to create an account with the email matching your subscription before you can change your settings. More details at: https://www.ripe.net/membership/mail/mailman-3-migration/
