RE: [address-policy-wg] ETNO Contribution on IP Addressing in a Post IPv4 World Reallocation of resources

["Remco van Mook" <Remco.vanMook@localhost]

Dear Christina and esteemed colleagues at ETNO,

Thank you for providing us with your opinion. You are absolutely correct
in the clarification you requested - it is ofcourse only after the NCC
approves the need that space can be transferred, it would be pointless
otherwise.

How I would envisage the system to work is the following:
- A LIR files a request for address space in pretty much the same way
that happens today
- After NCC approves the request, the request is put on a 'prequalified'
list; this list should be public.
- Address space that is returned to the NCC gets allocated to these
requests on some form of 'first come first served' basis.
- Alternatively, LIRs with an approved request on that list can try to
get IPv4 space transferred to them, up to the size of the request. 
- Either getting space allocated by NCC or getting space transferred
from another LIR fullfills the request which then gets taken off the
list.

The LIR can then later file another request, which is evaluated by NCC
etcetera.

Now, as for the requirement for the transferer to be an LIR is for a
simple reason. There has been an ongoing project to get a grip on the
ERX space - finding out who is currently entitled to what IPv4 space.
Right now, we don't have that certainty for IPv4 space which hasn't been
registered with an RIR. In other words, if the RIR doesn't have some
level of certainty on who the current holder is, and that the transferer
is actually entitled to receive the compensation for the transferred
space, we can't assist that transfer with some serious legal
repercussions. 

On the other hand, if a holder of ERX space wishes to 'monetize' that
right, it is very likely that the business case for becoming a LIR,
getting that space registered and transferred is very likely to be a
positive one.

Kind regards,

Remco van Mook

-----Original Message-----
From: address-policy-wg-admin@localhost
[
	    
	    
] On Behalf Of Kelaidi Christina
Sent: donderdag 16 oktober 2008 9:32
Subject: [address-policy-wg] ETNO Contribution on IP Addressing in a
Post IPv4 World Reallocation of resources

Dear colleagues

I am forwarding ETNO Position on the RIPE 2007-08 Policy Proposal. ETNO
supports this Policy Proposal, but requests for a clarification to be
included.

Christina Kelaidi
ETNO Naming Addressing and Numbering Issues (NANI) WG Chairperson

------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------
ETNO has considered the new version of the RIPE 2007-08 Policy Proposal
Enabling Methods for Reallocation of IPv4 Resources, submitted for
discussion in the RIPE Address Policy Working Group mailing list. ETNO
believes this revised version that provides for additional criteria to
demonstrate the need for an LIR to receive IPv4 addresses trough
transfer, is significantly improved. Therefore ETNO will support this
Policy Proposal. 

Still there are outstanding considerations regarding the extent and
effect of this proposal that should be addressed by the community.

1.	Introduction
ETNO members have carefully reviewed the new version of the RIPE Policy
Proposal 2007-08 related to the "Enabling Methods for Reallocation of
IPv4 Resources", which proposes to use inter-LIR transfer mechanisms.

This new version of the proposal has been examined in light of the
principles expressed in the two previous ETNO position papers circulated
in the RIPE Address Policy Working Group mailing list (CP082 - 2007/10,
and EC097 2008/05 publicly available also at www.etno.be, Position
Papers 2007/2008).

ETNO welcomes the opportunity to provide comments on this new version.

2.	ETNO analysis and comments

The major change between Version 2 and Version 3 of the policy proposal
is the requirement for the receiving LIR to have their need evaluated by
the RIPE-NCC before a transfer can be completed. ETNO believes that this
requirement is necessary in order to avoid speculative behaviours.

Based on the above ETNO will support RIPE 2007-08 "Policy Proposal
Enabling Methods for Reallocation of IPv4 Resources", but would like to
propose for a clarification to be included in the proposal. ETNO
suggests that following the text of the proposal: "An LIR may only
receive a transferred allocation after their need is evaluated by the
RIPE NCC", the following text should be inserted: "The transfer should
be formally approved by the RIPE-NCC".

3.	Outstanding considerations

ETNO has outstanding considerations regarding the extent and effect of
this proposal that should be addressed by the community. It should be
mentioned that these considerations do not impact the approval of the
current policy proposal.

1.	ETNO believes that reclamation by the RIRs of allocated but
unused addresses can offer a way to reuse IPv4 blocks of addresses. In
the future, what impact will this new policy have on any reclamation
activity? Is it possible to reconcile the reclamation activity from
historic, legacy space and the procedures for inter-LIR transfer? 

2.	Since the significant volume of allocated but unused addresses
resides in the historic, legacy space and these addresses are generally
not maintained by Local Internet Registries, what will be the impact of
this policy proposal? In the future will it be a requirement that the
donor be an LIR even in the situation where legacy space is being
transferred? Such a requirement could be counter productive to
reintroduce unused legacy space in the RIR/LIR management.

3.	Given the limited scope of the policy, does this proposal have a
significant impact on the availability of additional IPv4 addresses
prior to exhaustion of the pools of "fresh" IPv4 addresses from IANA?

4.	Conclusion

ETNO is positive to any flexibility that could provide a limited amount
of IPv4 addresses, and can help the transition to IPv6, but believes
that this will not solve the broad issue if IPv4 exhaust and should not
distract ISPs and operators from finding appropriate and long term
solutions to maintaining a stable Internet.

Based on the above ETNO will support RIPE 2007-08 "Policy Proposal
Enabling Methods for Reallocation of IPv4 Resources", but has requested
for a clarification to be included.




Any opinions expressed in the email are those of the individual and not necessarily of the company. This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and solely for the use of the intended recipient and do not constitute an offer or acceptance by Equinix, Inc., Equinix Europe Ltd or any of their group entities to buy or sell any products or services in any jurisdiction. If you have received this email in error please delete this email immediately and notify the IT manager.

This communication is sent on behalf of one of the European entities in the Equinix, Inc. Group. The ultimate holding company in Europe is Equinix Europe Ltd whose registered address is Quadrant House, Floor 6, 17 Thomas More Street, Thomas More Square, London E1W 1YW and the Company's registered number is 6293383. The registration details of other Group entities are available at www.eu.equinix.com