[address-policy-wg] 2016-03 New Policy Proposal (Locking Down the Final /8 Policy)
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2016-03 New Policy Proposal (Locking Down the Final /8 Policy)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2016-03 New Policy Proposal (Locking Down the Final /8 Policy)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Aleksey Bulgakov
aleksbulgakov at gmail.com
Mon Jun 6 23:54:04 CEST 2016
Hi. Why are we talking about 185./8 only? There are many unused allocations bigger than /8 but the NCC doesn't want to pay attention to them. E.g. If the LIR has the allocation 31./12 (this is for example only, I didn't check what RIR has 31./8 network) and didn't use it during 5 years (or other period) he should return it to the NCC pool or a part of it. There is 2015-01, that prevents speculations. And I don't see any reasons to implement 2016-03. "Sergey" <gforgx at fotontel.ru> wrote: > > Completely agree with Riccardo on this. > > I've addressed this question via IRC during GM, why the strict audit is not possible - and got a response that it's against policy. Google has supported this concern. > > If there is problem with policy, the policy should be changed, not workarounds against the policy added. > > > On 06/07/16 00:09, Riccardo Gori wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> although I understand the spirit of this policy in my opinion there's a big problem behind it: seems that has been thought for reasoucers not in use. >> I really don't get how a space can be de-registered once announced and in use and after have been allocated under regular procedures and business processes. >> >> A new entrant would see his investments vanified by a rule that make possibile transferts possbile only for old LIRs that acquired space before 09/2012. >> I think this really creates barrier to ingress in the market. >> >> If a return policy has to be proposed this should address the whole IPv4 RIPE Region space to be fair and catch where IPs are stockpiled and not in use. >> Anyway we all know that's quite impossible. >> >> To address the problem of abuse RIPE NCC should enforce audit and check if the LIR "make assignement(s)" as stated in the policy. >> This could be a way to get rid of buy/sell just for speculation. >> >> I cannot support this policy >> >> regards >> Riccardo >> >> -- >> >> Ing. Riccardo Gori >> e-mail: rgori at wirem.net >> >> WIREM Fiber Revolution >> Net-IT s.r.l. >> Via Cesare Montanari, 2 >> 47521 Cesena (FC) >> Tel +39 0547 1955485 >> Fax +39 0547 1950285 >> >> -------------------------------------------------------------------- >> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE >> This message and its attachments are addressed solely to the persons >> above and may contain confidential information. If you have received >> the message in error, be informed that any use of the content hereof >> is prohibited. Please return it immediately to the sender and delete >> the message. Should you have any questions, please contact us by re- >> plying to info at wirem.net >> Thank you >> WIREM - Net-IT s.r.l.Via Cesare Montanari, 2 - 47521 Cesena (FC) >> -------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > -- > Kind regards, > CTO at > Foton Telecom CJSC > Tel.: +7 (499) 679-99-99 > nic-hdl: SS29286-RIPE > AS42861 on PeeringDB, Qrator, BGP.HE.NET > > "Amazing photons > Carry our data worldwide > Never seem to stop" (c) JUNOS -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <https://lists.ripe.net/ripe/mail/archives/address-policy-wg/attachments/20160607/a1d7970c/attachment.html>
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2016-03 New Policy Proposal (Locking Down the Final /8 Policy)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2016-03 New Policy Proposal (Locking Down the Final /8 Policy)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]