Last Resort Registries
- Date: Thu, 20 Jul 1995 16:56:14 +0200
> bonito@localhost (Antonio_Blasco Bonito) writes:
>
> Unfortunately there are still cases of ISPs not providing registry
> services for their customers. For example US providers selling
> connectivity in Europe do not provide IP addresses. As far as I know
> they do not want to be part of the European Regional IR.
I do not know of *any* significant cases of this.
The issue which regional IR a provider gets allocations from
is not relevant in this discussion.
> > Additionally the Last-Resort registries form an anomaly in the RIPE NCC
> > charging system, because they do not contribute to NCC funding while
> > using NCC resources.
>
> This can eventually be solved in some way...
I agree, if we decide to keep them around we will have to charge them
like any other registry. Note however, that this is not the main argument
for doing away with them.
> I think it could be done but there is a strong need for a document
> explaining the new address assignment policy.
Fully agree!
> I think this document
> should have worldwide applicability and be published as an RFC.
Do not agree. For European Last-Resort registries a RIPE document is
sufficient.
> Local IRs need such a reference when they have to answer to strange
> address assignment requests eventually coming from network managers
> or small providers located in dispersed sites around the world.
Yep.
Daniel
