March 1996 - lir-wg - mailman.ripe.net

About 24th RIPE meeting announcement
by RIPE NCC Staff 19 Mar '96

19 Mar '96

Dear local registry contacts, It is high time that the announcement for the 24th RIPE meeting goes out. And it is a fact that we like all our local registries to know of this. Again. I'm not going to fill up your mailboxes by sending all RIPE-meeting-related messages to 2 separate mailinglists. This message is just to let all new people on this list know that all RIPE-meeting telated e-mails will be sent out on 'ripe-list' starting tomorrow. Therefore, if you want to know all about the meeting, please: - subscribe to the ripe-list mailinglist. To do this, mail to majordomo(a)ripe.net with in the message body: 'subscribe ripe-list'. or - check out ftp://ftp.ripe.net/ripe/Next-Meeting/ (tomorrow, 21st March) Kind regards, Roderik Muit RIPE NCC

1 0

Re: RIPE policy on static addresses
by Antonio_Blasco Bonito 13 Mar '96

13 Mar '96

Quoting from Rushdul.Mannan's message: > > > Antonio_Blasco Bonito <bonito(a)nis.garr.it> writes: > > > > Dear Local-IR's, > > > > this is the text about the use of dialup static addressing in > > ripe-104++, which is supposed to become a ripe document at the next > > meeting in Berlin. We, acting as a delegated local registry for > > several providers, have some coordination problem with them on the base > > of an official document which remains almost generic. > > > > 8. Static Dialup. Due to constraints on the available > > free pool of IPv4 address space, the use of static > > IP address assignments (e.g., one address per cus- > > tomer) for dial-up users is strongly discouraged. > > While it is understood that the use of static > > addressing may ease some aspects of administration, > > the current rate of consumption of the remaining > > unassigned IPv4 address space does not permit the > > assignment of addresses for administrative ease. > > Organizations considering the use of static IP > > address assignment are expected to investigate and > > implement dynamic assignment technologies whenever > > possible. If allocations for this purpose are > > indeed made, special allocation and verificatin pro- > > cedures apply. Please contact the RIPE NCC for > > details. > > > > Since the guidelines given upon request by RIPE NCC staff (see below) > > are precise in tieing the use of dialup static addresses to the > > availability (public or reserved) of customer data, I suggest that a > > careful but clear sentence stating this need is included in the > > ripe-104++ text. > > > > The issue of IPv4 address space becomming increasingly scarce IMHO > should now be crossing the boundaries of 'strong recommendations' > and 'hard rules'. > > I have gone to considerable lengths explaining the whole concept > of static and dynamic addressing to customers who are in the process > of setting up as a dial-up ISPs, but the fact remains that at the end > of the day they are still 'recommendations'. Also AFAIK dial-up ISPs > impliment static addressing not just for administrative ease (at their > end) but due to their customer preference. What I'm trying to say is > that if you give someone a choice they would consider the one which > keeps their customers happy. I think you missed my point. Given the situation you correctly describe, RIPE-NCC is trying to apply strict rules to Local Registries asking address space for static dialup. My point is that those rules are not clearly written in an official ripe document. That's all what I say. > > > > > Quoting from RIPE NCC Hostmaster's message: > > > ... here is the latest version of what we > > > send to companies using STATIC address assignments for dial-up. > > > > > > > > > Because the amounts of assigned address space will be based on 'number > > > of customers' rather than network infrastructure there are special > > > verification requirements. In general there will be three alternative > > > methods: > > > > > > 1) Registration of assignments in the registry database > > > > > > or > > > > > > 2) Submission of customer data to RIR in confidence > > > > > > or > > > > > > 3) Periodic submission of the number of addresses assigned. > > > The LIR has to formally agree to on-site inspection by the RIR or its > > > agents of customer data on demand. Reasonable costs for the > > > inspections are to be bourne by the LIR concerned. Additionally the > > > LIR will formally agree to make available to the RIR the assignment > > > data of a reasonable and randomly drawn sample of the addresses assigned. > > > Sampled data must be made available immediately on first demand. > > > > > > The RIPE NCC prefers METHOD 1 and will use method 2 and 3 only if > > > really necessary. > > > > Local IRs already (should if some don't) follow RIPE guidelines when > assigning address space, they need not be further subjected to the above. > Its the end user, with demands, who needs to be educated. > > > -- > Regards, > > > R Mannan > Xara Networks Ltd > > > > > > > > > > ---------- ---------- > > Antonio-Blasco Bonito E-Mail: bonito(a)nis.garr.it > > GARR - Network Information Service c=it;a=garr;p=garr;o=nis;s=bonito > > c/o CNUCE - Istituto del CNR Tel: +39 50 593246 > > Via S. Maria, 36 Fax: +39 50 904052 > > I-56126 PISA Telex: 500371 CNUCE I > > Italy Url: http://www.nis.garr.it/nis/staff/bonito.html > > ---------- ---------- > > > -- ---------- ---------- Antonio-Blasco Bonito E-Mail: bonito(a)nis.garr.it GARR - Network Information Service c=it;a=garr;p=garr;o=nis;s=bonito c/o CNUCE - Istituto del CNR Tel: +39 50 593246 Via S. Maria, 36 Fax: +39 50 904052 I-56126 PISA Telex: 500371 CNUCE I Italy Url: http://www.nis.garr.it/nis/staff/bonito.html ---------- ----------

1 0

RIPE policy on static addresses
by Antonio_Blasco Bonito 11 Mar '96

11 Mar '96

Dear Local-IR's, this is the text about the use of dialup static addressing in ripe-104++, which is supposed to become a ripe document at the next meeting in Berlin. We, acting as a delegated local registry for several providers, have some coordination problem with them on the base of an official document which remains almost generic. 8. Static Dialup. Due to constraints on the available free pool of IPv4 address space, the use of static IP address assignments (e.g., one address per cus- tomer) for dial-up users is strongly discouraged. While it is understood that the use of static addressing may ease some aspects of administration, the current rate of consumption of the remaining unassigned IPv4 address space does not permit the assignment of addresses for administrative ease. Organizations considering the use of static IP address assignment are expected to investigate and implement dynamic assignment technologies whenever possible. If allocations for this purpose are indeed made, special allocation and verificatin pro- cedures apply. Please contact the RIPE NCC for details. Since the guidelines given upon request by RIPE NCC staff (see below) are precise in tieing the use of dialup static addresses to the availability (public or reserved) of customer data, I suggest that a careful but clear sentence stating this need is included in the ripe-104++ text. Quoting from RIPE NCC Hostmaster's message: > ... here is the latest version of what we > send to companies using STATIC address assignments for dial-up. > > Kind regards, > > John Crain > RIPE NCC > > CUT HERE :-) > ____________________________________________________________________________________ > > > > > Large static address space assignments for dialup connections are > strongly discouraged and subject to special registration/verification > procedures. We may consider assigning separate address space for these > requirements. Organizations considering the use of static IP address > assignment are encouraged to investigate the use of dynamic assignment > technologies in order to implement their networks. Current > discussions in the Internet community reflect the intention to make > the use of dynamic addressing for dial-up customers a requirement in > future. This is to prevent the exhaustion of the remaining unassigned > IPv4 address space. > > > STATIC ADDRESS ASSIGNMENTS FOR DIALUP: > > Policy is to strongly discourage major address space useage for these > purposes. These uses can potentially cause a major change in the > address space usage rate. IRs will assign address space for these > purposes conservatively (approx. 3 months expected usage). The > policy regarding static assignments is subject to change in reaction > to changed address space usage patterns. > > Because the amounts of assigned address space will be based on 'number > of customers' rather than network infrastructure there are special > verification requirements. In general there will be three alternative > methods: > > 1) Registration of assignments in the registry database > > or > > 2) Submission of customer data to RIR in confidence > > or > > 3) Periodic submission of the number of addresses assigned. > The LIR has to formally agree to on-site inspection by the RIR or its > agents of customer data on demand. Reasonable costs for the > inspections are to be bourne by the LIR concerned. Additionally the > LIR will formally agree to make available to the RIR the assignment > data of a reasonable and randomly drawn sample of the addresses assigned. > Sampled data must be made available immediately on first demand. > > The RIPE NCC prefers METHOD 1 and will use method 2 and 3 only if > really necessary. > > If you have any queries about applying these guidelines to your > registry or your customers please contact: > > <hostmaster(a)ripe.net> > ---------- ---------- Antonio-Blasco Bonito E-Mail: bonito(a)nis.garr.it GARR - Network Information Service c=it;a=garr;p=garr;o=nis;s=bonito c/o CNUCE - Istituto del CNR Tel: +39 50 593246 Via S. Maria, 36 Fax: +39 50 904052 I-56126 PISA Telex: 500371 CNUCE I Italy Url: http://www.nis.garr.it/nis/staff/bonito.html ---------- ----------

1 0

IP Address Space Request Form Expired
by RIPE NCC Staff 01 Mar '96

01 Mar '96

Dear Local IRs, The "European IP Address Space Request Form" (ripe-129) as well as the "Supporting Notes for European IP Address Space Requests" (ripe-128) have expired yesterday. We plan to revise these documents after the new policy document ripe-104++ has been published. This is expected to happen at the next RIPE Meeting in April. Therefor the expiry date for ripe-128 and ripe-129 is now set to May 31st, 1996. No other changes have been made. If you have any problems retrieving these documents or if you have any other questions, please don't hesitate to contact <ncc(a)ripe.net>. Kind regardss, Mirjam Kuehne RIPE NCC

1 0