[address-policy-wg] Enabling Methods for Reallocation of IPv4 Resources
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Enabling Methods for Reallocation of IPv4 Resources
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Conflict over right to use IP addresses in The Netherlands
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
michael.dillon at bt.com
michael.dillon at bt.com
Wed Mar 12 17:50:08 CET 2008
> If the wording in RIPE stated the word "lease", why wouldn't > that work? A customer comes and "leases" IP space from RIPE > for the duration of their contract with RIPE (membership > dues, fulfillment of rules, etc.) When their membership > ends, the lease is broken and the IP space returns to RIPE. People are talking about direct LIR to LIR transfers where the IPv4 space does not return to RIPE. > I bring your attention to: > http://www.ripe.net/rs/news/global-ipv6-assign-2001-12-22.html > > 4.1. Address space not to be considered property The transfer policies under discussion are for IPv4 only, not IPv6. By the way, I agree that the best way to handle IPv4 transfers is for LIRs to return surplus address space to RIPE and for RIPE to allocate/assign those blocks in the normal way. The only real change needed is to add some kind of first-come first-served rule in case the demand for IPv4 is higher than the supply. --Michael Dillon
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Enabling Methods for Reallocation of IPv4 Resources
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Conflict over right to use IP addresses in The Netherlands
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]