Re: [address-policy-wg] Draft agenda Address Policy Working Group RIPE 46

[leo vegoda <]

Hi Joao,

Joao Luis Silva Damas joao@localhost wrote:
> Leo,
>
> thanks for the numbers. How about the rest of the information requested?
You wanted some information on the background, types of PI requests and 
other things.

We don't keep statistics on the motivation for a request for PI address 
space. In fact, we don't ask for it in most cases. We just make sure 
that the requester is aware of the issues that come with small blocks of 
address space and any possible alternatives to PI address space.

However, we do keep statistics on the stated use the address space will 
be put to. However, the majority of PI assignments we make will be used 
for more than one purpose. In these cases it is often impossible to 
label an assignment with a single category. Instead, we label it as 
"Miscellaneous".

This year, the "Miscellaneous" category has been appropriate in about 
69% of assignments. Another 19% were for office LANs. We also had 4% 
used for server hosting, 3% for broadband services, about 1% for P2P 
links and about 1% for GPRS services.

[...]

> 89% of the requests seems to be an indication of a need for this type 
> of assignments, yet there seems to be "some support" to end it.
>
> Can we have a look at the arguments that were discussed about this 
> subject?
I asked the PI Task Force whether it might be better to just publish an 
archive of the discussion on the web site. There was no object and so I 
have asked our Ops people to put it up later today. It will be available 
from:

http://www.ripe.net/ripe/about/maillists.html

Regards,

--
leo vegoda
RIPE NCC
Registration Services Manager