RE: [address-policy-wg] Re: [ncc-services-wg] Request Forms: updated and available on LIR Portal

["Christian Rasmussen" <]

Hi Hans,


The question is how complex an evaluation must be? The facts needed to
evaluate a normal IP requests are simply the number of nodes needing a
public IP address. In case one or more nodes needs more than 1 IP address
then documentation is needed to explain why to exceed the normal rules, also
in case the expected growth pr. year exceeds 100%.

It would of course be easier to falsify the number of nodes than to falsify
the documentation, but in case an end user intends to falsify information in
order to get more IP addresses than justifyable, then I don't see any easy
way to prevent this.

But is there actually any other reasons for extensive documentation? Who
benefits from the work all LIRs are obligated to perform by gathering this
documentation? If normal requests did not need any documentation it would
make it MUCH easier for all LIRs and of course for the customers who would
not need to take the time to answer a lot of complex questions. If you as an
end user only had to document your needs in case you were trying to get more
IP addresses than normal justifyable, then it would probably also discourage
a lot of the unserious requests.

I would find it reasonable if larger requests still required some form of
documentation, for example /24 and above. But it would of course still be
very important for all LIRs to stress that the information received from the
enduser must be correct.

This proposal probably goes against one of the basic goals; conservation,
but is it reasonable to spend so many ressources on conserving IP addresses
when we actually don't have any immediate problem?





Med venlig hilsen/Best regards

Christian Rasmussen
Hosting manager, jay.net a/s

Smedeland 32, 2600 Glostrup, Denmark

Email: noc@localhost
Personal email: chr@localhost
Tlf./Phone: +45 3336 6300, Fax: +45 3336 6301

Produkter / Products:
http://hosting.jay.net

> -----Original Message-----
> From: address-policy-wg-admin@localhost
> [
	    
	    
 Behalf Of Hans Petter Holen
> Sent: 29. august 2003 12:52
> To: Sascha Lenz
> Cc: address-policy-wg@localhost
> Subject: Re: [address-policy-wg] Re: [ncc-services-wg] Request Forms:
> updated and available on LIR Portal
>
>
> > BUT... information like the equipment being used or a network
> > plan or so _must_ be optional information, not _required_ information.
> > It can't be that a company is _required_ to make statements about
> > their network and equipment if they want to have IP-Adresses!
> > (and no, RIPE doesn't always qualify for receiving such information).
>
> This indeed an interesting point of view. It has been the practice for as
> long as I can remember for the RIPE NCC to ask for documnetation for the
> need for IP addresses.
>
> Is there strong support in the community to remove this cirteria ?
>
> If not, how should the LIR/RIR verify this criteria ?
>
> Best Regards,
>
> Hans Petter
>
>