[ppml] "Recommended Practices" procedure

[Ray Plzak]

I hope you are not confusing RIPE (sometimes referred to as the RIPE
community) and the RIPE NCC. The RIR is the RIPE NCC. From their respective
web sites:

1. RIPE (Réseaux IP Européens) is a collaborative forum open to all parties
interested in wide area IP networks in Europe and beyond. The objective of
RIPE is to ensure the administrative and technical coordination necessary to
enable the operation of a pan-European IP network.

2. The RIPE NCC is one of five Regional Internet Registries (RIRs) providing
Internet resource allocations, registration services and co-ordination
activities that support the operation of the Internet globally.

The RIPE NCC also provides services for the benefit of the Internet
community at large. These services include:

    * Development and maintenance of the RIPE Whois Database
    * Administrative support for the RIPE community.

Currently there is a RIPE meeting in progress, not a RIPE NCC meeting. Thus
it is perfectly understandable, given the above, that RIPE would discuss
routing policy.

Ray

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ppml-bounces at arin.net [mailto:ppml-bounces at arin.net] On Behalf Of
> Jason Schiller (schiller at uu.net)
> Sent: Monday, April 24, 2006 5:46 PM
> To: Scott Leibrand
> Cc: ppml at arin.net
> Subject: Re: [ppml] "Recommended Practices" procedure
> 
> I too was frustrated by the comments that "ARIN does not set routing
> policy".
> 
> It can be very difficult to advise your company to do the right thing for
> the good of the Internet when it is counter to good business
> practices.  It is a little bit easier if one can hold up a "good IP
> stewardship policy" that most people are following.
> 
> So should we re-charter ARIN to publish a non-binding "Routing Policy
> Guideline Manual (RPGM)"  or should we just fold this into the NRPM?
> 
> The other question is if this is the right forum?  and if not, then what
> is the right forum?  NANOG?  only joint ARIN/NANOG meetings?
> 
> Also, how does this relate to other regions?  I am told that RIPE
> discusses routing policy.  Should there be an NRO equilivent role with
> regard to global routing policy?
> 
> 
> ___Jason
> 
> ==========================================================================
> Jason Schiller                                               (703)886.6648
> Senior Internet Network Engineer                         fax:(703)886.0512
> Public IP Global Network Engineering                       schiller at uu.net
> UUNET / Verizon                         jason.schiller at verizonbusiness.com
> 
> The good news about having an email address that is twice as long is that
> it increases traffic on the Internet.
> 
> On Sat, 15 Apr 2006, Scott Leibrand wrote:
> 
> > Date: Sat, 15 Apr 2006 09:23:49 -0400 (EDT)
> > From: Scott Leibrand <sleibrand at internap.com>
> > To: Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com>
> > Cc: ppml at arin.net
> > Subject: [ppml] "Recommended Practices" procedure
> >
> > On 04/14/06 at 11:41pm -0700, Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > as we also discussed at the ARIN XVII meeting, it would be useful
> for
> > > > some group to define guidelines for assignment policy that would
> clarify
> > > > the issues you raise.  it seems that in ARIN policy is not the
> correct
> > > > place yet no other group comes to mind.  anyway, as a rough
> suggestion, I
> > > > would say that end sites should get 4 to 8 times as much address
> space
> > > > assigned as they think they might use using today's networking
> techniques.
> > > >
> > > Perhaps we need a BCP track within ARIN for number resource
> utilization.
> > > A process similar to, but, potentially a bit less formal than, the
> IRPEP
> > > which would be used to develop "Recommended Practices for Number
> Resource
> > > Allocation, Assignment, and Utilization".
> >
> > I like this idea.
> >
> > > I agree this doesn't belong in policy, but, I do think that ARIN might
> be
> > > the right body to coalesce such information, at least on a regional
> basis.
> >
> > Perhaps we could use the existing policy process (or something similar
> and
> > parallel) to develop recommendations, though.  Have folks submit
> > "Recommendation Proposals", which could be run through the PPML and
> > presented at ARIN meetings.  Perhaps a lower standard of consensus would
> > be required for adoption...
> >
> > -Scott
> > _______________________________________________
> > PPML mailing list
> > PPML at arin.net
> > http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/ppml
> >
> 
> _______________________________________________
> PPML mailing list
> PPML at arin.net
> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/ppml