New subject: address-policy-wg Digest, Vol 9, Issue 17

23 May 2012

      Dear Ingrid:

Thanks for replying.

So is that to speaking:

As long as the need is inside the region, part of the
infrastructure(CDN network for example) with the IP address can be
announced outside of Ripe service region(as I see many are doing
that).

Am I correct?

On Wed, May 23, 2012 at 5:17 PM,  <address-policy-wg-request@ripe.net> wrote:
...
Send address-policy-wg mailing list submissions to
       address-policy-wg@ripe.net
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
       https://www.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/address-policy-wg
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
       address-policy-wg-request@ripe.net
You can reach the person managing the list at
       address-policy-wg-owner@ripe.net
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of address-policy-wg digest..."
Today's Topics:
  1. Re: Any-cast or uni-cast solutions (Tore Anderson)
  2. Re: Any-cast or uni-cast solutions (Jan Zorz @ go6.si)
  3. Re: Any-cast or uni-cast solutions (Jan Zorz @ go6.si)
  4. Re: Any-cast or uni-cast solutions (Jan Zorz @ go6.si)
  5. Re: Assignment transfer among LIR (Shane Kerr)
  6. Re: Assignment transfer among LIR (Pascal Gloor)
  7. Re: Assignment transfer among LIR (Jan Zorz @ go6.si)
  8. Re: Any-cast or uni-cast solutions (Randy Bush)
  9. Re: Any-cast or uni-cast solutions (Ingrid Wijte)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Wed, 23 May 2012 12:01:13 +0200
From: Tore Anderson <tore.anderson@redpill-linpro.com>
Subject: Re: [address-policy-wg] Any-cast or uni-cast solutions
To: Ingrid Wijte <ingrid@ripe.net>
Cc: address-policy-wg@ripe.net
Message-ID: <4FBCB569.5060204@redpill-linpro.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
* Ingrid Wijte
...
I would like to give some further clarification on this.
The RIPE NCC allocates/assigns address space to organisations who have a
need in the RIPE NCC service region. The address space must be
originated from the RIPE NCC service region. Due to the diverse nature
of businesses, in addition to this there can be announcements from other
regions.
Just to make 110% certain, you're saying here that it is the *need* that
must be in the RIPE region, not the *organisation*, correct?
Example 1: China Unicom sets up a legal organisation in the Netherlands,
joins the NCC, and requests an allocation from which they intend to
assign addresses to broadband customers in China. They intend to
advertise the allocated prefix(es) to peers at AMS-IX (as well as from
other exchange points around the world).
Example 2: I, representing an existing LIR in the RIPE region, build a
data center in Australia and set up a server hosting business there. I
want to make an assignment to a new customer in this data center from my
IPv4 allocation received from the RIPE NCC, and request that from the
NCC hostmater using a ripe-488 form.
Assuming all the documentation is otherwise in order and the need is
real, will these requests be granted or denied?
Best regards,
--
Tore Anderson
Redpill Linpro AS - http://www.redpill-linpro.com
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Wed, 23 May 2012 12:03:28 +0200
From: "Jan Zorz @ go6.si" <jan@go6.si>
Subject: Re: [address-policy-wg] Any-cast or uni-cast solutions
To: address-policy-wg@ripe.net
Message-ID: <4FBCB5F0.4050009@go6.si>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
On 5/23/12 10:28 AM, Randy Bush wrote:
...
...
You can announce them anywhere you like. But you cannot assign them to
end users outside outside of the region.
really?  so i have a /16 from ncc and i spread it over pops in ams, lon,
and nyc, but i can not have bgp-speaking customers in that address space
in nyc?  if true, that is soooo broken.
+1
(I just saw upfront that comment coming in :) :) :) )
Jan
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Wed, 23 May 2012 12:11:36 +0200
From: "Jan Zorz @ go6.si" <jan@go6.si>
Subject: Re: [address-policy-wg] Any-cast or uni-cast solutions
To: address-policy-wg@ripe.net
Message-ID: <4FBCB7D8.5090903@go6.si>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
On 5/23/12 12:01 PM, Tore Anderson wrote:
...
Example 1: China Unicom sets up a legal organisation in the Netherlands,
joins the NCC, and requests an allocation from which they intend to
assign addresses to broadband customers in China. They intend to
advertise the allocated prefix(es) to peers at AMS-IX (as well as from
other exchange points around the world).
They could also say during the initial alloc process that they'll
allocate this resources to potential customers in RIPE-NCC region and
the use it elsewhere. Just saying...
...
Example 2: I, representing an existing LIR in the RIPE region, build a
data center in Australia and set up a server hosting business there. I
want to make an assignment to a new customer in this data center from my
IPv4 allocation received from the RIPE NCC, and request that from the
NCC hostmater using a ripe-488 form.
Assuming all the documentation is otherwise in order and the need is
real, will these requests be granted or denied?
good questions, wonder what the answers will be :)
Cheers, Jan
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Wed, 23 May 2012 12:12:48 +0200
From: "Jan Zorz @ go6.si" <jan@go6.si>
Subject: Re: [address-policy-wg] Any-cast or uni-cast solutions
To: address-policy-wg@ripe.net
Message-ID: <4FBCB820.2020704@go6.si>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
On 5/23/12 10:59 AM, Tore Anderson wrote:
...
If on the other hand out-of-region assignments are valid and allowed, I
cannot fathom why those fast growing ISPs in China, India, Vietnam and
so on that were allocating IPv4 addresses from APNIC at an incredible
rate right up until the day APNIC hit the /8 have not simply set up
legal organisations in the RIPE region, joined the NCC, and continued
allocating from here in more or less the same rate as before APNIC ran out.
Maybe those IPv4-hungry operators are just not aware of this "option" ;)
Jan
------------------------------
Message: 5
Date: Wed, 23 May 2012 13:11:54 +0200
From: Shane Kerr <shane@time-travellers.org>
Subject: Re: [address-policy-wg] Assignment transfer among LIR
To: Pascal Gloor <pascal.gloor@finecom.ch>
Cc: "address-policy-wg@ripe.net" <address-policy-wg@ripe.net>
Message-ID:
       <20120523131154.55f5f50d@shane-eeepc.home.time-travellers.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Pascal,
On Tuesday, 2012-05-22 16:26:50 +0000,
Pascal Gloor <pascal.gloor@finecom.ch> wrote:
...
...
IOW, I don't see any clear solutions to this problem for existing
contracts.
To be honest, me neither, but I wanted some community feedback to see
if there would be a solution I didn't think of.
In my mind, this is the MAIN problem with IPv4 exhaustion. Anyone who
got IPv4 address before exhaustion can provide services, anyone else
cannot.
Think back to the Internet in 1990 and where it would be today if the
phone companies held all of the IPv4 space and you had to go through
them for all connectivity.
While James Blessing's "use IPv6" suggestion is perhaps not easy, it's
the best answer we have. :(
--
Shane
------------------------------
Message: 6
Date: Wed, 23 May 2012 12:30:17 +0000
From: Pascal Gloor <pascal.gloor@finecom.ch>
Subject: Re: [address-policy-wg] Assignment transfer among LIR
To: "Jan Zorz @ go6.si" <jan@go6.si>, "address-policy-wg@ripe.net"
       <address-policy-wg@ripe.net>
Message-ID: <CBE2A372.25BDA%pascal.gloor@finecom.ch>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
...
Why moving elswhere then?
It's the other way around. We are the wholesale cable provider and this
might be an issue to gain new customers if they don't have IPs and can't
have them from us.
Pascal
------------------------------
Message: 7
Date: Wed, 23 May 2012 14:57:02 +0200
From: "Jan Zorz @ go6.si" <jan@go6.si>
Subject: Re: [address-policy-wg] Assignment transfer among LIR
To: "address-policy-wg@ripe.net" <address-policy-wg@ripe.net>
Message-ID: <4FBCDE9E.9050604@go6.si>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
On 5/23/12 2:30 PM, Pascal Gloor wrote:
...
...
Why moving elswhere then?
It's the other way around. We are the wholesale cable provider and this
might be an issue to gain new customers if they don't have IPs and can't
have them from us.
I think you nailed it.
So it's not the fairness and competitiveness issue but purely lack of
resources and IPv4 depletion that is beating your business up (and not
just yours).
You have several ways out, as already pointed in this discussion:
- Big evil CGN
- A bit less evil A+P derivates (MAP, 4RD, etc) - when they become available
- IPv6 with NAT64/DNS64 in the core
Pick your poison :)
Cheers, Jan
------------------------------
Message: 8
Date: Wed, 23 May 2012 22:31:19 +0900
From: Randy Bush <randy@psg.com>
Subject: Re: [address-policy-wg] Any-cast or uni-cast solutions
To: Tore Anderson <tore.anderson@redpill-linpro.com>
Cc: Sander Steffann <sander@steffann.nl>, Lu Heng
       <h.lu@anytimechinese.com>,      address-policy-wg@ripe.net
Message-ID: <m2wr439g7s.wl%randy@psg.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
...
That is my understanding, at least. I asked this question to the RIR
panel at the mic in Rome, whether and APNIC region ISP could (post APNIC
depletion) set up a LIR in the RIPE region (or any other region), and
allocate addresses from there and assign them to end users in their home
region. The answer (which came from Geoff Huston IIRC) was something
along the lines of ?no, you have to assign the addresses in the service
region from which they were allocated?.
you mis-heard
i am in the apnic region and chaired address policy sig in apnic for
some years.  this is not the case.
randy
------------------------------
Message: 9
Date: Wed, 23 May 2012 17:17:09 +0200
From: Ingrid Wijte <ingrid@ripe.net>
Subject: Re: [address-policy-wg] Any-cast or uni-cast solutions
To: address-policy-wg@ripe.net
Message-ID: <4FBCFF75.9050708@ripe.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Hi Tore,
...
* Ingrid Wijte
...
I would like to give some further clarification on this.
The RIPE NCC allocates/assigns address space to organisations who have a
need in the RIPE NCC service region. The address space must be
originated from the RIPE NCC service region. Due to the diverse nature
of businesses, in addition to this there can be announcements from other
regions.
Just to make 110% certain, you're saying here that it is the *need* that
must be in the RIPE region, not the *organisation*, correct?
The need and the route origination must be in the RIPE NCC service region.
Example 1: China Unicom sets up a legal organisation in the Netherlands,
joins the NCC, and requests an allocation from which they intend to
assign addresses to broadband customers in China. They intend to
advertise the allocated prefix(es) to peers at AMS-IX (as well as from
other exchange points around the world).
This example would be ok for several reasons:
The requestor is a RIPE NCC member. They have infrastructure in the
region and the address space will originate from the RIPE NCC service
region.
Other similar examples would be VPN Providers but also Satellite
On 5/23/12 12:01 PM, Tore Anderson wrote:
providers that are based in the region and have customers globally.
...
Example 2: I, representing an existing LIR in the RIPE region, build a
data center in Australia and set up a server hosting business there. I
want to make an assignment to a new customer in this data center from my
IPv4 allocation received from the RIPE NCC, and request that from the
NCC hostmater using a ripe-488 form.
As long as the prefix is originated in the RIPE NCC service region, this
would be approved. The LIR has an allocation, is announcing it in the
RIPE NCC service region, and is making PA assignments to its customers.
Regards,
Ingrid Wijte
Registration Services Assistant Manager
RIPE NCC
...
Assuming all the documentation is otherwise in order and the need is
real, will these requests be granted or denied?
Best regards,
End of address-policy-wg Digest, Vol 9, Issue 17
************************************************
-- 
--
Kind regards.
Lu

This transmission is intended solely for the addressee(s) shown above.
It may contain information that is privileged, confidential or
otherwise protected from disclosure. Any review, dissemination or use
of this transmission or its contents by persons other than the
intended addressee(s) is strictly prohibited. If you have received
this transmission in error, please notify this office immediately and
e-mail the original at the sender's address above by replying to this
message and including the text of the transmission received.

Re: [address-policy-wg] address-policy-wg Digest, Vol 9, Issue 17

Lu Heng

Ingrid Wijte

tags

participants (2)