Regarding point number 2 and min. assignment windows. I've been taking care of RIPE issues for the past 4 years. First 2 years with another LIR and for the last 2 with the present LIR. When I was with the first LIR, my min assign. window was a /24. When I changed work, I applied for the company to be a LIR and obviously had a starting min ass of 0. After a number of assignments my the min ass. win was put to /28. I've made numerous number of /29s and /28s together with some /25s. I've also attended the RIPE training course and thus know how important taking care of IP is. To stop the waiting queue of over 1 week, I asked for my assign. window to be increased to a /24 or at least /25. The response I got was that I first have to apply for three of /24s (or above!) for the assign. win to change. The point is that when a new hostmaster comes along, she/he correctly and strickly sticks to RIPE's policies. I feel that the customer/client relationship is lost when this happens. One particular assignment of a /22 and /23 was accepted without any problems with a particular hostmaster because this hostmaster knew that I knew the policies and had previously accepted my other requests. But my last /25 request was handled by a new hostmaster and it took many e-mail and complaints before it was accepted. And to make it worse, I was returning a /23 and renumbering with a /25!!!! Maybe RIPE should not give a min assign. win of /25 as standard. I think that RIPE have to know that the LIRs know their policies well before. RIPE should be aware of the LIRs and have a file indicating possible IP wastage, continous good assignments etc. Do other LIRs experience this?? In the meantime I'm still on an assign. win of /28 :( Regards, Duncan Vella Melita Cable plc
-----Original Message----- From: owner-lir-wg@ripe.net [mailto:owner-lir-wg@ripe.net]On Behalf Of Stephen Burley Sent: Thursday, April 13, 2000 10:55 AM To: lir-wg@ripe.net Subject: Further to the training questions
Hi The lack of response worries me to my questions about training i therefore would like to request some changes to a few things.
1. Since the RIPE NCC members are basically funding the education policy, (to which you have a documented policy)it would be in the best interest of the community if we were informed yearly of : a)What courses were suggested by hostmaster and other personel. b)which courses were rejected and on what grounds. c)which courses were completed and any certification recieved. Also what incentives are offered to hostmasters as rewards for furthering there "Internet" knowledge.
Our hostmasters are our most valuable asset in the NCC, if we do not look after them and keep the m up to date it is only us that suffer, with this in mind i would like to see the above in place. I would also like to see this information for the last 3 years.
2. To relieve the stress on the wait que i would like to see a standard a min ssignment window applied to all none new LIR's, something not too small but something not too large say a /25 - this means that the hostmasters would not be boged down with small insignificant requests and would be able to concentrate on answering the larger requests thus getting used to larger business needs.
Regards, Stephen Burley UUNET EMEA Hostmaster