Vladislav, I have to strongly disagree with your assertions. poty@iiat.ru wrote:
Nick, just because there is the word "private". Why should RIPE or some other organization (including mine) provide the registration and supporting service (for example - uniqueness) for PRIVATE networks?
First of all, RIPE is the Community, the RIPE NCC is executing the policies and providing e.g. the Registration Services. Every organsiation obtaining services, e.g. an IP-Address Assignment or an Allocation are contributing to offset the expenses; either directly or by way of an existing LIR.
If a company wants to use interconnection with other companies - it is their PRIVATE deal. And they should use their PRIVATE means for achieving that!
The TCP/IP Technology (including the resources to uniquely identify the individual components) are - and indeed should continue to be - accessible to the full community. Whether using this stuff on the "Internet" or for some other purpose is not a discriminating factor here.
Vladislav Potapov Ru.iiat
PS: we have already seen the disadvantage of liberally applying RFC1918, i.e. non-unique, addressing in organisations that eventually were (forced to) connecting to other organisations....