[address-policy-wg] 2013-03 New Draft Document and Impact Analysis Published (No Need - Post-Depletion Reality Adjustment and Clean up)
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2013-03 New Draft Document and Impact Analysis Published (No Need - Post-Depletion Reality Adjustment and Clean up)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2013-03 New Draft Document and Impact Analysis Published (No Need - Post-Depletion Reality Adjustment and Clean up)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Gert Doering
gert at space.net
Wed Jul 24 19:58:23 CEST 2013
Hi, On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 05:27:06PM +0200, Filiz Yilmaz wrote: > I am not a lawyer, but hypothetically speaking, if your proposal > gets accepted there is some (again totally hypothetical?) potential > that some LIRs may chose to rush and get whatever is left in the > NCC pool (which is the rest of the last /8?) without really needing > them, simply because they do not need to show any justification > after all. They want it, they will get it and probably RIPE NCC > will have to deal with some very serious First in First Out (granted) > service scheme... Uh, Filiz, there is no real difference between "old policy" and "with 2013-03 in place" in that regard. Both limit the address space that a single LIR can "rush and get whatever is left" to a *single /22*. So if you want to hoard, you need to open 5000 LIRs today, each of them applying for a /22, and documenting the need for a *single* IPv4 address (as the /22 allocation is not sized based on the difference between "I need a single address" vs. "I need a /8" - need is need) and a single IPv4 address is easier documented than a new corporation opened to become LIR. If you want it after 2013-03 is in place, you need to open 5000 LIRs, each of them applying for a /22, and not documenting the need for a single IPv4 address anymore. But you still need to incoprorate 5000 companies. The only place where "document need" makes a difference is if a LIR already has allocated space, which needs to be filled to 80% today, and that would go away with 2013-03 - but there is just no way a single LIR can "grab the rest of the last /8 pool". But maybe I'm misunderstanding your point? (The /22 in the "last /8 policy" was chosen to ensure that every single LIR in existence today can get their /22, and we'll still have some left - the /8 will last for 16.000 /22s, and the number of active LIR is still below 9000 today) Gert Doering -- NetMaster -- have you enabled IPv6 on something today...? SpaceNet AG Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann D-80807 Muenchen HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen) Tel: +49 (89) 32356-444 USt-IdNr.: DE813185279 -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 306 bytes Desc: not available URL: <https://lists.ripe.net/ripe/mail/archives/address-policy-wg/attachments/20130724/1cd7b555/attachment.sig>
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2013-03 New Draft Document and Impact Analysis Published (No Need - Post-Depletion Reality Adjustment and Clean up)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2013-03 New Draft Document and Impact Analysis Published (No Need - Post-Depletion Reality Adjustment and Clean up)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]