[members-discuss] [ncc-announce] [news] RIPE NCC Members and Multiple LIR Accounts

Oh my. I would like to think that in Poland you were done with socialist 
economy. In Sweden we do have some tendencies in that direction, most 
obvious when it comes to rental flats. And well, it was not originally a 
socialist idea but a temporary rule during World War II, just that nobody 
realised the war ended + 70 years ago.

So what we have is regulated prices on rental flats. As a result there is 
no money in building new houses and thus a shortage. If you want to rent a 
flat you have to wait for 10-20 years. And because of the shortage a 
rental contract has a "value" that you don't want to give up. So we have a 
shortage *and* empty flats. And even though you are not allowed to sell 
the contracts people still do (pretending to swap flats, which is legal).

In short - the idea might sound nice but it does not work. If holders of 
unused IPv4 space are allowed to sell addresses on an open market, chances 
are much bigger it will be used. If not, the holder will probably keep it 
in case it will be needed in the future. And as with the flats, peoble 
would still sell them, but probably not update the registry and then we 
have other, serious problems.

So even if it seems unfair that early adopters can make money from 
something they once got more or less for free, the alternatives are less 
tempting.

Cheers,

Daniel

On Fri, 12 Feb 2016, Dariusz Siedlecki wrote:

> Witam,
>
> I agree 100% with this opinion.
>
> It should be prohibited to sell/buy address space between two LIR (not /22 
> also olders assignments).
> It should be some solidarity or prices should be regulated by RIPE not by 
> market.
>
> Now companies who have lot of IPv4 are against any changes.
> New companies have tied hands.
> And RIPE is in the middle.
>
> But they all pay the same fee.
>
> Best regards
> Dariusz
>
>
>>  On 12/02/2016 09:34, Kurt Jaeger wrote:
>> >  No, seriously: use IPv6.
>>  Most of my customers have IPv6.
>>  Sadly, the rest of the do not
>>
>>  On 12/02/2016 11:59, Dominik Nowacki wrote:
>> >  This, or CG NAT. 1 village / end point / 1-2 IPs and CG NAT for the 
>> >  whole village + /56 IPv6 per household.
>>  Is really CGNAT the RIPE-NCC solution for ipv4 exhaustion ?
>>  As a network engineer, and as a customer, CGNAT look like the worst
>>  solution.
>> 
>>
>>  To answer the talk from Gert and other, about the holy mission of the
>>  RIPE, I agree with them, somehow.
>>  The RIPE is supposed to show justice, right ? Equality ? Good not evil ?
>>
>>  Let's reap all useless IPv4.
>>  You want to sell IPv4 ? Obviously, you do not need that subnet.
>>  You do not announce that subnet over the internet ? Reaped.
>>  You want to transfert that subnet between two obviously not related
>>  compagny ? Reaped.
>>
>>  As the Protector of the weaks, and to preserve viability of the
>>  newcommers, the RIPE-NCC *must not* allow people to make business on the
>>  back of the new.
>>  IPv4 are a resource of common interest, not a plot of land that can be
>>  sell to the richer.
>>
>>  Do not you think ?
>> 
>
>
> ----
> If you don't want to receive emails from the RIPE NCC members-discuss
> mailing list, please log in to your LIR Portal account and go to the general 
> page:
> https://lirportal.ripe.net/general/
>
> Click on "Edit my LIR details", under "Subscribed Mailing Lists". From here, 
> you can add or remove addresses.

_________________________________________________________________________________
Daniel Stolpe           Tel:  08 - 688 11 81                   stolpe at resilans.se
Resilans AB             Fax:  08 - 55 00 21 63            http://www.resilans.se/
Box 45 094							      556741-1193
104 30 Stockholm