Summary

  • RIPE Proposal 2026-03 calls itself a clarification, but its redline removes the IPv6 policy’s good-faith renewal paragraph.
  • The draft also adds stand-alone audit and LIR-closure sections to a policy that currently has neither.

IPv6 policy has a funny filing-cabinet problem: the rule that says “good faith” is being filed under “clarification,” while two new drawers labelled “audit” and “closure” appear beside it.

RIPE’s published policy, RIPE-738, says address space is licensed rather than owned and subject to periodic renewal. Its Section 4.1 then supplies the working test: licences are generally renewed when a holder makes a good-faith effort to meet the criteria; RIPE reserves non-renewal for addresses not used as intended or obligations followed in bad faith. At renewal, the rules in force at that time apply. RIPE-738

Version 1.0 of Proposal 2026-03 strikes out that entire paragraph. The proposal, published on 19 October, says the aim is to make the post-provisioning lifecycle clearer and align IPv6 wording with IPv4. Its rationale says the compliance language has been unchanged since 2002 and promises no substantive change to the policy’s original intent. The proposal

Then the draft adds text that is missing from today’s RIPE-738. Proposed Section 9 describes an audit mandate and points to the RIPE NCC Audit Activity document. Proposed Section 10 lists grounds on which RIPE NCC may close a Local Internet Registry: unpaid money, a significant period without contact, or repeated policy violations. In the published RIPE-738, section 9 is References; the document moves on to appendices. The difference is visible in the policy text, not buried in a footnote.

This does not invent audits from scratch. RIPE-694, published in 2018, already describes assisted, selected and reported audits. It says an audit cannot continue indefinitely, sets concrete deadlines for requested information, and says missing the deadline may lead to termination of the relevant service agreement. The 2026 draft would give audit and closure their own place in the IPv6 policy. RIPE NCC Audit Activity

That is a real edit to the rulebook’s surface: one renewal standard disappears; audit and closure language moves onto the page. The draft does not explain how those changes preserve the same practical effect. “Significant period” and “consistently violates” also arrive without a measure in the proposal text. Those are exactly the phrases operators should pin down while the wording is still open.

The proposal remains in its discussion phase through 17 November. The proposer and working-group chairs decide what happens next under RIPE’s published policy process. This is the moment to ask for a clean account of what the deleted paragraph did, what replaces it, and how the new closure grounds connect to existing audit procedures. RIPE Policy Development Process

Sources