WHOIS Mi LACNIC
Su dirección IP es / Your IP address is: 

Improving LACNIC Policies

Seeking to inspire our community to develop new policy proposals, we are publishing the List of Improvements included below.

Please note that each ‘improvement' is not a policy proposal, so a formal writeup is not necessary.

The purpose of this list is to help gauge community interest in certain areas. Our goal is to create synergy among the community for the creation of new policy proposals, in the hope that, together, those listing possible improvements and those reading them will find possible solutions which can be submitted in the form of a policy proposal.

EVERYONE can contribute to the list below, adding any additional improvements they'd like to see in regards to the policies.

  • If you'd like to suggest another improvement, please send it to info-politicas@lacnic.net

  • If you decide to write up a policy proposal addressing one or more of these potential improvements, you can submit it via politicas.lacnic.net

  • If you wish to be put in touch with a Policy Shepherd* to guide you through the process of submitting your proposal, please contact info-politicas@lacnic.net

    *Policy Shepherds are members of the community with experience working with the PDP (Policy Development Process) who volunteer their time to help others submit their proposals.

1. Modify the minimum size of assignments to ISPs

Due to IPv4 address exhaustion, major access providers no longer offer the possibility of assigning /24 prefixes to their customers (small ISPs). In turn, these smaller ISPs do not qualify for a minimum assignment from LACNIC (/22) and therefore their operations are affected. This proposal seeks to allow smaller ISPs to request IPv4 addresses between a /24 and a /22.

2. Shorten last call for comments

Currently, when a policy proposal reaches consensus it is published for comments on the Public Policy List for a period of 45 days. This period is too long for a person to express their disagreement with a decision taken at the Public Policy Forum. This 45-day "idle time" delays the process, therefor it would be convenient to shorten the last call for comments.

See the Policy Development Process

3. Policy on how RDAP information can be accessed

Currently, LACNIC policies consider only how Bulk Whois information is managed and how it can be queried. Considering the development of RDAP and its progress in the LACNIC region, it would be good to have a policy defining how to request access to RDAP information.

4. Remove the multi-homing requirement for end user

See the LACNIC Policy Manual

Policy 2.3.3.4- Assignments to End Users

5. Editorial review of the entire text of the LACNIC Policy Manual.

The text currently available has undergone dozens of modifications due to the multiple proposals that have been approved and incorporated over time. Unfortunately, these changes mean that the text is now excessively long and includes certain inconsistencies and repetitions (e.g., repetitions in the IPv4 and IPv6 sections). In addition, parts of the IPv4 policy no longer apply now that we are in the final phases of IPv4 exhaustion.

Top CHK_LACNIC