Cathy, At 12:16 02/02/08, CJ Wittbrodt wrote:
First I'd like to respond to your last sentence, your English is just fine... thanks for the thoughtful note. I have one comment (see below)
Thanks. Are you supporting my idea except this one?
At 09:52 02/02/07, CJ Wittbrodt wrote: >Maybe we should look at the people you refer to as wanting to be "in" >and figure out what distinguishes them from just some end user who >should have a /48 from their upstream...?
Yes, this is the point.
I basically supports RIPE's consensus. First, requiring 776 customer sites as criteria of getting /32 is a too high barrier and should be relaxed in any way. Maybe, anyone can agree with this so far.
Next, "any LIR can get /32 until 2000 /32 per a region" is almost OK, but one problem may be to use the existing definition(s) of "LIR" mainly defined for IPv4. In ARIN region, you can become a LIR if you pay some money as far as I heard. This may include an large enterprise. One concern here is that this rule will give /32 end users even if they are large enterprise. We should avoid this as Thomas suggested.
In the ARIN region, it is true, anyone can become a member of ARIN by paying a fee. to get address space, however, you have to give quite a lot of justification. Every ARIN member does not have address space. I just want to make sure that's clear. I am a member of ARIN as an individual. I paid $500 for the year 2002. I have no address space and I am not what you'd call an LIR.
Thank you for your clarification. Maybe your comment supports an idea of avoiding use of the term "LIR". Regards, Takashi Arano