[address-policy-wg] 2016-03 New Version and Impact Analysis Published (Locking Down the Final /8 Policy)

Greetings!

As additional information for oppose this proposal I would like to say next:

1) RIPE has reserved space/free pool that it's also will be used under
current polices for LIRs, there are a lot of space in it. And those
space will be used for new LIRs. You can see that it will be enough for
10-15 years or more.

https://www.ripe.net/publications/ipv6-info-centre/about-ipv6/ipv4-exhaustion/ipv4-available-pool-graph

2) Policy name should be not like /8 but on all free/reserve space
because it should relay on all rest. So name "/8" is not correct.

3) last year changes about LIRs and it's /22 we see that they didn't
make any significant change in new LIR stats. I told that already when
it was discussion of 24 month limitation and multilirs registration.
That doesn't make any sense on stats. Current rate will give 2-3 years
more space enough from 185 space. So thats more then enough.

Here is some stats for this year.

2016-1	214	219136	1.31%	48.49%	8134656
2016-2	280	287744	1.72%	46.77%	7846912
2016-3	285	291840	1.74%	45.03%	7555072
2016-4	314	321536	1.92%	43.11%	7233536
2016-5	312	336896	2.01%	41.1%	6896640
2016-6	239	244736	1.46%	39.64%	6651904
2016-7	231	236544	1.41%	38.23%	6415360
2016-8	300	303616	1.81%	36.42%	6111744
2016-9	317	325376	1.94%	34.48%	5786368
2016-10	279	284416	1.7%	32.78%	5501952

But we have in RIPE ~14Mlns IPs more as same as in 2013.

So here I make conclusion that things that people told before about last
space will expire too fast is not true. That's just normal situation.

4) This policy will make some other type of IPs, we make things more
complex, but we should make things/rules/databases less complex. We
don't need new one color of IP.

5) In case of such proposal ISPs will move to IPv6 more slowly. So RIPE
push to everybody to go IPv6 and from other size they don't allow that
to happen. Everybody understand that at America they just gave out all
IPv4 and America is the most IPv6 country. So less limitations - more
progress! So what do you select?

6) As far as RIPE control limitations - RIPE control the market. And
this is not correct. As we see this is already not 1st time of the
limitations (/22, then IPv4 transfer 24month hold, then stop multilirs,
then limitations for companies overtaking that make impossible
overtaking between different countries, problem still exists)

So what do we select?
I will be thankful for feedback.


Yuri at NTX NOC







On 19.10.2016 11:05, Marco Schmidt wrote:
> Dear colleagues,
> 
> The draft documents for version 3.0 of the policy proposal 2016-03, "Locking Down the Final /8 Policy" have now been published, along with an impact analysis conducted by the RIPE NCC.
> 
> The goal of this proposal is to ban transfers of allocations made under the final /8 policy. Also the proposal specifies what resources must be added to the RIPE NCC IPv4 available pool.
> 
> Some of the differences from version 2.0 include:
> 
> -    Clarification that changes to holdership of address space as a result of company mergers or acquisitions are not affected by proposed transfer restriction
> -    Legacy space handed over to the RIPE NCC will be added to the IPv4 available pool
> 
> You can find the full proposal and the impact analysis at:
> https://www.ripe.net/participate/policies/proposals/2016-03
> 
> And the draft documents at:
> https://www.ripe.net/participate/policies/proposals/2016-03/draft
> 
> We want to draw your attention to two changes, which we hope it will make your proposal evaluation easier.
> 
> -    Policy proposals now contain a diff tool that allows easy comparison of different proposal versions – simply click on the “View Changes” symbol right beside the list of proposal versions.
> -    The RIPE NCC impact analysis only mentions areas where  the proposal is actually expected to have an impact. For example, if the analysis makes no comment about financial or legal impact, it means that no such impact is expected.
> 
> We encourage you to read the draft document and send any comments to <address-policy-wg at ripe.net> before 17 November 2016.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Marco Schmidt
> Policy Development Officer
> RIPE NCC
> 
> Sent via RIPE Forum -- https://www.ripe.net/participate/mail/forum
>