You are here: Home > Participate > Join a Discussion > RIPE Forum
RIPE Forum v1.4.2

Address Policy Working Group

Threaded
Collapse

[address-policy-wg] do we need a policy for avoiding "multiple unjustified LIRs"?

User Image

Jordi Palet Martinez

2021-11-23 11:43:09 CET

Hi all,

After looking at the video from Marco, today presentation/discussion and the recent discussions on this, as I just mention, should we work in a policy proposal to amend the internal procedure so the justification for additional LIRs is stronger?

I understand many cases for the need of an additional LIR, but doing valid for *any artificial case* is not good.

Any though on that? Possible ideas about how we define the border line?

As usual, I'm happy to work on this myself, or together with other folks.

 
Regards,
Jordi
@jordipalet
 
 



**********************************************
IPv4 is over
Are you ready for the new Internet ?
http://www.theipv6company.com
The IPv6 Company

This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or confidential. The information is intended to be for the exclusive use of the individual(s) named above and further non-explicilty authorized disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited and will be considered a criminal offense. If you are not the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited, will be considered a criminal offense, so you must reply to the original sender to inform about this communication and delete it.




User Image

Gert Doering

2021-11-23 11:46:36 CET

Hi,

On Tue, Nov 23, 2021 at 11:43:09AM +0100, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via address-policy-wg wrote:
> After looking at the video from Marco, today presentation/discussion and the recent discussions on this, as I just mention, should we work in a policy proposal to amend the internal procedure so the justification for additional LIRs is stronger?

There is no "justification for additional LIR" policy, as that's a
contractual matter...

Gert Doering
        -- NetMaster
-- 
have you enabled IPv6 on something today...?

SpaceNet AG                      Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard, Michael Emmer
Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14        Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann
D-80807 Muenchen                 HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen)
Tel: +49 (0)89/32356-444         USt-IdNr.: DE813185279
User Image

Jordi Palet Martinez

2021-11-23 11:52:38 CET

Exactly, that's why a policy may be needed if I understood correctly Marco response, but anyway, happy to get further inputs from staff about that.

The question is "may it be handled only via a contractual change" or we need a policy to "implement that contractual change"?
 
Regards,
Jordi
@jordipalet
 
 

El 23/11/21 11:46, "address-policy-wg en nombre de Gert Doering" <address-policy-wg-bounces _at_ ripe _dot_ net en nombre de gert _at_ space _dot_ net> escribió:

    Hi,

    On Tue, Nov 23, 2021 at 11:43:09AM +0100, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via address-policy-wg wrote:
    > After looking at the video from Marco, today presentation/discussion and the recent discussions on this, as I just mention, should we work in a policy proposal to amend the internal procedure so the justification for additional LIRs is stronger?

    There is no "justification for additional LIR" policy, as that's a
    contractual matter...

    Gert Doering
            -- NetMaster
    -- 
    have you enabled IPv6 on something today...?

    SpaceNet AG                      Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard, Michael Emmer
    Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14        Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann
    D-80807 Muenchen                 HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen)
    Tel: +49 (0)89/32356-444         USt-IdNr.: DE813185279
    To unsubscribe from this mailing list, get a password reminder, or change your subscription options, please visit: https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/address-policy-wg



**********************************************
IPv4 is over
Are you ready for the new Internet ?
http://www.theipv6company.com
The IPv6 Company

This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or confidential. The information is intended to be for the exclusive use of the individual(s) named above and further non-explicilty authorized disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited and will be considered a criminal offense. If you are not the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited, will be considered a criminal offense, so you must reply to the original sender to inform about this communication and delete it.




Staff

2021-11-23 11:53:20 CET

Hello everybody,

Of cause no.

That will not help. always possible to avoid.
Doing more complex polices is not good way. NCC had already lot of 
issues with that.
Does any body remember how they asked to use email with the name to use 
in their database and people should change emails lot of times to 
sutisfy NCC.... We did  a lot of noise and NCC canceled it. Brr...

If people request space - then they need it and they select this way to 
get it with NCC.

This is normal process. No rush here. NCC should work as usual.

Yury


User Image

Jordi Palet Martinez

2021-11-24 11:14:10 CET

Not acting is a path for abuse and stockpiling. Not fair and we must resolve it avoiding it as much as possible.

 
Regards,
Jordi
@jordipalet
 
 

El 23/11/21 11:59, "address-policy-wg en nombre de Staff" <address-policy-wg-bounces _at_ ripe _dot_ net en nombre de policy _at_ ntx _dot_ ru> escribió:

    Hello everybody,

    Of cause no.

    That will not help. always possible to avoid.
    Doing more complex polices is not good way. NCC had already lot of 
    issues with that.
    Does any body remember how they asked to use email with the name to use 
    in their database and people should change emails lot of times to 
    sutisfy NCC.... We did  a lot of noise and NCC canceled it. Brr...

    If people request space - then they need it and they select this way to 
    get it with NCC.

    This is normal process. No rush here. NCC should work as usual.

    Yury


    To unsubscribe from this mailing list, get a password reminder, or change your subscription options, please visit: https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/address-policy-wg



**********************************************
IPv4 is over
Are you ready for the new Internet ?
http://www.theipv6company.com
The IPv6 Company

This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or confidential. The information is intended to be for the exclusive use of the individual(s) named above and further non-explicilty authorized disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited and will be considered a criminal offense. If you are not the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited, will be considered a criminal offense, so you must reply to the original sender to inform about this communication and delete it.




User Image

Marco Schmidt

2021-11-24 14:02:05 CET

RIPE NCC staff member

Hello Jordi,

Thank you for your question.

The policy proposal 2018-01, "Organisation-LIR Clarification in IPv6 
Policy" agreed upon by the Address Policy WG gave a clear mandate to the 
RIPE NCC to allocate IPv6 resources per LIR, regardless of whether it is 
a single or multiple LIR account.
https://www.ripe.net/participate/policies/proposals/2018-01

As I pointed out yesterday during my presentation, the collection of 
IPv6 allocations via multiple LIR accounts appears to conflict with some 
of the goals of the IPv6 policy. However, as was generally agreed 
yesterday during the Address Policy WG session, it might be time to 
review these goals. This could be one way forward to provide guidance to 
the RIPE NCC about how we should handle requests for additional IPv6 
allocations from parties that already have large IPv6 blocks and no 
clear reason for requesting additional IPv6 allocations.

Regarding your suggestion concerning opening multiple LIR accounts, this 
would be something for the RIPE NCC membership and the Executive Board 
to discuss. As you indicated, defining reasonable boundaries between 
justified and unjustified might be a challenge.

Kind regards,
Marco Schmidt
Assistant Manager Registry Services
RIPE NCC

On 24/11/2021 11:14, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via address-policy-wg wrote:
> Not acting is a path for abuse and stockpiling. Not fair and we must resolve it avoiding it as much as possible.
>
>   
> Regards,
> Jordi
> @jordipalet
>   
>   
>
> El 23/11/21 11:59, "address-policy-wg en nombre de Staff" <address-policy-wg-bounces _at_ ripe _dot_ net en nombre de policy _at_ ntx _dot_ ru> escribió:
>
>      Hello everybody,
>
>      Of cause no.
>
>      That will not help. always possible to avoid.
>      Doing more complex polices is not good way. NCC had already lot of
>      issues with that.
>      Does any body remember how they asked to use email with the name to use
>      in their database and people should change emails lot of times to
>      sutisfy NCC.... We did  a lot of noise and NCC canceled it. Brr...
>
>      If people request space - then they need it and they select this way to
>      get it with NCC.
>
>      This is normal process. No rush here. NCC should work as usual.
>
>      Yury
>
>
>      To unsubscribe from this mailing list, get a password reminder, or change your subscription options, please visit: https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/address-policy-wg
>
>
>
> **********************************************
> IPv4 is over
> Are you ready for the new Internet ?
> http://www.theipv6company.com
> The IPv6 Company
>
> This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or confidential. The information is intended to be for the exclusive use of the individual(s) named above and further non-explicilty authorized disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited and will be considered a criminal offense. If you are not the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited, will be considered a criminal offense, so you must reply to the original sender to inform about this communication and delete it.
>
>
>
>
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, get a password reminder, or change your subscription options, please visit: https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/address-policy-wg