Hello, Thank you Sander for the info. I looked into it. Indeed it was a long discussion. Only one point: As you can see, at the time of suggestion of that proposal, there were NO opposing arguments ( according to available data at that time. ) Now there are new data, specially some experiments with re-allocation of address spaces through selling/buying them. Is it possible to re-activate, or re-consider previously approved policies? Because of this policy for re-allocating address spaces through selling/buying, now we see a very HOT bazar and many are making money with it, while none of us ( I mean LIRs ) have paid for any particular address spaces to RIPE NCC. This is easily driving people to lie ( make a new LIR, get some IPs, sell it .... and again and again ) Kind Regards, Saeed. -----Original Message----- From: Sander Steffann Sent: Saturday, February 21, 2015 4:35 PM To: Saeed Khademi Cc: address-policy-wg@ripe.net Working Group Subject: *FIREWALL-SPAM ALERT* Re: [address-policy-wg] 2015-01 New Policy Proposal (Alignment ofTransfer Requirements for IPv4 Allocations) Hello Saeed,
Now, isn't it possible, that RIPE NCC develops a policy ( maybe there one ) to take back these advertised address spaces ? because their initial criteria is not valid any more ? ( obviously those organization, do not need these address spaces. )
I can understand LEASING some IPs for some period of time, but I can't understand selling them.
We (this working group) had that discussion in 2007 when policy proposal 2007-08 was introduced. At the time it was decided that reallocation (transfers) were a better / more viable solution than trying to reclaim unused addresses. Please take a look at the mailing list archives to see how the discussion went. It was a quite long discussion. Proposal 2007-08: https://www.ripe.net/ripe/policies/proposals/2007-08 Mailing list archive: https://www.ripe.net/search?SearchableText=2007-08&portal_type%3Alist=Message Cheers, Sander