[address-policy-wg] Question about Last /8 Policy

* Daniel Baeza (Red y Sistemas TVT)

> El 07/07/2014 15:19, Tore Anderson escribió:
> 
>> Only 3 out of 3882 allocated /22s are present on the listing service.
>> Furthermore, one of those 3 specify in the description that it's "lease
>> only", so the actual number of /22s listed for transfer there is just 2.
>>
>> This isn't a problem. It doesn't need fixing.
> 
> This is the Public Listing Service. As far I know, you dont need to be 
> there to sell/trade your allocations, so we didnt really know how many 
> /22's are in sell.

All transfers made under ripe-606 section 5.5 are listed on the RIPE
NCC's web site. There have been a few of them, but I see nothing
suggesting that this is being done in a repeated and abusive manner.

http://www.ripe.net/lir-services/resource-management/ipv4-transfers/table-of-transfers

> About the "lease only". This is what is publicity in the Listing 
> Service, but as far we know, can be at sell too. Also, this is another 
> kind of "bad use"* of the last /22. The LIR who owns that block dont 
> need it.

The very purpose of an LIR is to further distribute number resources to
End Users. Apart from this single purpose, an LIR has no need for number
resources. It is always the End Users that ultimately need number
resources; the LIRs "need" is simply the sum of its End Users' need.

Furthermore, RIPE policy does not dictate what kind of business models
the LIRs may have. I would assume that in the end, most commercial
organisations will distribute the costs of running the LIR across all of
its End Users, with a profit margin that makes the entire endeavour
worth while. I see nothing wrong with this at all.

> And to be honest, we dont need to wait till is a problem. Because when 
> It is a problem, usually is too late to do something as you will not be 
> able to recover those space since it has been sold when it was permitted.
> 
> (*) Yes, I know, there isnt a "bad use" rule in RIPE, but that doesnt 
> mean there should be. :)

I strongly feel that we should not spend time bloating the policy with
rules against every imaginable "bad use" under the sun. If - and only
if! - there is a real problem somewhere, then let's fix it.

Tore