[address-policy-wg] 2010-02 New Policy Proposal (Revoke and Re-assign Fairly)
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2010-02 New Policy Proposal (Revoke and Re-assign Fairly)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2010-02 New Policy Proposal (Revoke and Re-assign Fairly)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Rémi Després
remi.despres at free.fr
Thu Apr 1 17:41:45 CEST 2010
Full support for maintaining the April Foools' Day tradition ;-). RD Le 1 avr. 2010 à 14:36, Nick Hilliard a écrit : > Number: 2010-01 > Policy Proposal Name: Revoke and Re-assign Fairly > Author: Nick Hilliard, INEX > Proposal Version: 1.0 > Submission Date: 1 April 2010 > Current Phase: Discussion - Open for Discussion > Phase ends/ended: 1 April 2010 > Latest Status: Initial Community Discussion > Suggested WG for Discussion and Publication: Address Policy > Proposal Type: New > Policy Term: Indefinite > Policy Documents to be Affected: > * IPv4 Address Allocation and Assignment Procedures for the RIPE NCC > Service Region (ripe-492) > > > Summary of Proposal: > > This proposal revokes all previous IPv4 LIR allocations and direct / LIR > assignments, returning all ERX and RIPE NCC-assigned IPv4 address space > back to the RIPE NCC, where it can be re-assigned fairly, using new > policies and guidelines. > > The RIPE NCC has been acting as RIR in the European / Middle-East > geographical areas since 1989. Due to egregiously lenient policies and > gross end-user address wastage, in combination with a more recent tendency > to horde IPv4 addresses in anticipation of a future shortage, recent > research has suggested that approximately 97% of IPv4 address assigned and > allocated through the RIPE NCC aren't actually used at all, and never were. > Furthermore, this research suggests that if all this address space were > returned to the RIR for re-assignment, this would create enough slack space > in the IPv4 address pool to service all future requests in the RIPE NCC > service region for approximately 100-150 years, based on current actual > run-rate, rather than the current fantasy figures published by the RIPE NCC. > > Also included as part of this policy is a future restriction to limit all > future direct assignments to 640 IPv4 address, because that should be > enough for anyone. > > Policy Text: > a. Old text > > Remove sections 5, 6 and 7 in RIPE 492. > > b. New policy text > > Insert new section 5 in RIPE 492: > > -- > 5.0 Policies and Guidelines for Allocations and Assignments > > An allocation is a block of IPv4 addresses from which assignments are taken. > > All allocations and assignments made prior to April 1, 2010 are hereby > revoked, cancelled, and made null and void. LOL!!11!!!1! > > The RIPE NCC will allocate 640 IPv4 addresses to each LIR, because that > that should be more than enough for anyone. PI assignments requests will > be greeted with even more giggles than they currently are. > -- > > a. Arguments supporting the proposal > > Every LIR and PI holder is hoarding address space like there's no tomorrow. > By forcing a reboot of the entire registry system, every holder will be > equally wrong-footed, and will realise that there's no need to hoarde > address space after all. > > This policy will have the side effect of ensuring that this insane rush to > IPv6 is entirely unnecessary, proving beyond all doubt that the ITU > seriously has no clue when it comes to Internet resource assignment. > > b. Arguments Opposing the Proposal > > It is likely that nay-sayers and other party-poopers will come out of the > wood-work to bleat about how this proposal is unfair. The author advises > that they get a life and stop hoarding numbers. After all, they're only > numbers. And if they really need more, they can contact me directly (see > contact details above). > > Some companies will attempt to claim that they have more than 640 > customers. Clearly, this can't be true because any company with more than > 640 customers would be making a profit, which everyone knows to be a > ridiculous claim. >
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2010-02 New Policy Proposal (Revoke and Re-assign Fairly)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2010-02 New Policy Proposal (Revoke and Re-assign Fairly)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]