Re: [sig-policy] prop-134: PDP Update withdrawn by author
Hi Jordi, Thanks for your suggestion. Secretariat will consult with the APNIC EC. Regards Sunny On 24/02/2020 8:53 pm, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ wrote: > Hi Bertrand, all, > > As indicated in the meeting, the withdraw of this proposal is "temporary", in > view of the commitment from the EC/secretariat to review the discrepancies in > the actual PDP and SIG guidelines, assuming that this will be brought back to > the community, following the bottom-up-approach, but the next meeting > (maximum). > > I still thing that this should not be a task done only by the EC/secretariat > but instead a Taks Force should be setup. I hope the EC can still consider > setting up this TF. > > As a result of the EC review or TF review the community should be able to > decide how to move on, including, if needed, new policy proposals. > > Regards, > Jordi > @jordipalet > > > > El 24/2/20 3:57, "Bertrand Cherrier" nombre de b.cherr...@micrologic.nc> escribió: > > Dear colleagues > > Version 2 of prop-134: PDP Update, did not reach consensus and was > withdrawn by the author at the APNIC 49 Open Policy Meeting. > > Proposal details, including the full text of the proposal, history, and > links to previous versions are available at: > > https://www.apnic.net/community/policy/proposals/prop-134/ > > We'd like to thank the author and everyone for taking the time to > discuss this proposal. > > Regards > Sumon, Bertrand, Ching-Heng > Policy SIG Chairs > * sig-policy: APNIC SIG on resource management policy > * > ___ > sig-policy mailing list > sig-policy@lists.apnic.net > https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy > > > > > ** > IPv4 is over > Are you ready for the new Internet ? > http://www.theipv6company.com > The IPv6 Company > > This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or > confidential. The information is intended to be for the exclusive use of the > individual(s) named above and further non-explicilty authorized disclosure, > copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if > partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited and will be > considered a criminal offense. If you are not the intended recipient be aware > that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this > information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly > prohibited, will be considered a criminal offense, so you must reply to the > original sender to inform about this communication and delete it. > > > > * sig-policy: APNIC SIG on resource management policy > * > ___ > sig-policy mailing list > sig-policy@lists.apnic.net > https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy > * sig-policy: APNIC SIG on resource management policy * ___ sig-policy mailing list sig-policy@lists.apnic.net https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy
Re: [sig-policy] prop-133: Clarification on Sub-Assignments
Hi Sunny, all, Let me try to clarify. 2.2.3 mention "address space that is delegated to an LIR" ... "for specific use within the Internet infrastructure they operate". Let's put aside, for the moment, the end-user case. If you read 9.2. Initial IPv6 allocations and 10.0. IPv6 assignments, there is not any explicit reference to assignments for an LIR. We could interpret 10.1.4.1. Initial assignment "Organizations are eligible for an IPv6 Provider Independent delegation if they are able to demonstrate a valid reason that an assignment from their ISP, or LIR, is not suitable.", as if an ISP/LIR can't assign part of their own allocation to its own network, but it is really weird. So, I'm wondering if this is valid case anymore, or it is one of those things that come from the original IPv6-policy, and was drafted due to lack of experience at that time. Do we have a case for that? In other RIRs, this has been already removed. Regards, Jordi @jordipalet El 24/2/20 4:39, "Srinivas Chendi" escribió: Hello Jordi, On 22/02/2020 2:20 pm, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ wrote: > Hi all, > > After my previous response to Owen, I can't find anymore any the text in the actual policy (neither guidelines) about assignments. So, I'm wondering if I was wrong, or it has been removed at some point and I don't recall it ... Could the secretariat point out to the specific text about that? If it has been removed, clearly there is a need to further update section 2.2.3 to remove that reference and avoid the mismatch. You mean section 2.2.3 text? It is not removed. You can find it in the current policy manual here https://www.apnic.net/community/policy/resources#2.2.3.-Assigned-address-space > > One more request for the secretariat. Could you please provide stats on the number of ISP (not end-users) assignments, for example in the last 12-15 years, in order to understand if this is a real requirement? Noted! Secretariat will provide the stats soon. Regards Sunny > > Anyone can provide examples of why an ISP could need and assignment instead of using their own allocation? > > Thanks! > > Regards, > Jordi > @jordipalet > > > > > > ** > IPv4 is over > Are you ready for the new Internet ? > http://www.theipv6company.com > The IPv6 Company > > This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or confidential. The information is intended to be for the exclusive use of the individual(s) named above and further non-explicilty authorized disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited and will be considered a criminal offense. If you are not the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited, will be considered a criminal offense, so you must reply to the original sender to inform about this communication and delete it. > > > > * sig-policy: APNIC SIG on resource management policy * > ___ > sig-policy mailing list > sig-policy@lists.apnic.net > https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy > ** IPv4 is over Are you ready for the new Internet ? http://www.theipv6company.com The IPv6 Company This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or confidential. The information is intended to be for the exclusive use of the individual(s) named above and further non-explicilty authorized disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited and will be considered a criminal offense. If you are not the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited, will be considered a criminal offense, so you must reply to the original sender to inform about this communication and delete it. * sig-policy: APNIC SIG on resource management policy * ___ sig-policy mailing list sig-policy@lists.apnic.net https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy
Re: [sig-policy] prop-134: PDP Update withdrawn by author
Hi Bertrand, all, As indicated in the meeting, the withdraw of this proposal is "temporary", in view of the commitment from the EC/secretariat to review the discrepancies in the actual PDP and SIG guidelines, assuming that this will be brought back to the community, following the bottom-up-approach, but the next meeting (maximum). I still thing that this should not be a task done only by the EC/secretariat but instead a Taks Force should be setup. I hope the EC can still consider setting up this TF. As a result of the EC review or TF review the community should be able to decide how to move on, including, if needed, new policy proposals. Regards, Jordi @jordipalet El 24/2/20 3:57, "Bertrand Cherrier" escribió: Dear colleagues Version 2 of prop-134: PDP Update, did not reach consensus and was withdrawn by the author at the APNIC 49 Open Policy Meeting. Proposal details, including the full text of the proposal, history, and links to previous versions are available at: https://www.apnic.net/community/policy/proposals/prop-134/ We'd like to thank the author and everyone for taking the time to discuss this proposal. Regards Sumon, Bertrand, Ching-Heng Policy SIG Chairs * sig-policy: APNIC SIG on resource management policy * ___ sig-policy mailing list sig-policy@lists.apnic.net https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy ** IPv4 is over Are you ready for the new Internet ? http://www.theipv6company.com The IPv6 Company This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or confidential. The information is intended to be for the exclusive use of the individual(s) named above and further non-explicilty authorized disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited and will be considered a criminal offense. If you are not the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited, will be considered a criminal offense, so you must reply to the original sender to inform about this communication and delete it. * sig-policy: APNIC SIG on resource management policy * ___ sig-policy mailing list sig-policy@lists.apnic.net https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy
