Peter Galbavy <peter@demon.net> writes:
I would put it even more stongly. RIPE is there to do a jobs, which is being a registry. Please will a RIPE rep. show me where it says that they have legal and/or moral responsibility to dictate how a company does business ?
...
Please keep away from trying to develop business models for the 'net. That is the jobs of the companies that pay your wages. You are not there to decide how applications will work today. Feel free to sit on working groups and influence future developments, which will make the 'net a better place, but please do not try to change the way non-RIPE organisations are already working.
Peter, we are not dictating how you do business and certainly the RIPE NCC is not developing business models for the net. We are indeed providing registration services among other things. The IPv4 address space is a very limited resource and consequently address space conservation is part of the policies we have to implement when acting as a European Regional Internet Registry. The global policies are set by IANA and the local European variations thereof in the RIPE local-IR working group, i.e. this forum. Implementing conservation policies is the single item which gives the NCC the most grief and the most work. But someone has to do this in the interest of the Internet as a whole and if we would not do it it would be bad for the industry. We would very much like to be spared public abuse of the kind we experience from time to time when we question practises which are inherently wasteful of address space for little or no good reason. Please imagine where Internet routing would be now if we would have continued to assign /16s (Bs) to anyone with more than 254 hosts on a physical subnet or if noone would have pushed for a registry system that is independent and yet responsive to provider needs, sustains itself and allows for routing aggregation. Daniel