February 2016 - members-discuss

About "ownership"
by Jérôme Nicolle 26 Feb '16

26 Feb '16

Hi, The current debates made me wonder : how come we've had an inetnum market in place whereas an inetnum cannot have a market value ? It's my understanding that the IP adress space is nothing but numbers and that RIR/LIRs are only responsible for the uniqueness of allocations and assignements, that is, a transfer of liability over a shared and common immaterial resource, between community members. I'm wondering how come we made "Temporary and conditionnal liabality transfer" a synonym of "perpetual and inconditional usufruct transfer". May you please enlight me ? Thanks ! -- Jérôme Nicolle +33 6 19 31 27 14

5 4

Please disable distribution to subscribed MLs
by Jérôme Nicolle 22 Feb '16

22 Feb '16

Hi, Fore every mail posted to members-discuss, I get 3 error messages from 3rd party mailling-list servers, namely : sympa(a)chd.sx do-not-reply(a)tickets.denit.net sympa(a)list2.orange.com Could moderators suspend distribution to addresses within these domains until they clean-up their subscriptions ? Best regards, -- Jérôme Nicolle +33 6 19 31 27 14

1 0

Re: [members-discuss] RIPE NCC Members and Multiple
by Jérôme Nicolle 21 Feb '16

21 Feb '16

Hello Claudiu, Le 18/02/2016 21:23, Claudiu Foleanu a écrit : > Everyone will do the math before opening a new lir. So the problem will go away! I can't agree because as explained with the taxi licence analogy, I think we've shot ourselves in the foot by letting a market establish itself in the past years - as taxi licence holders did. It can only lead to ressource pooling and lending by people who will dedicate themselves to preserving assets rather than improving the network (IPv6). We need to think ahead of market tendencies, because restricting the flow of ressources will raise subnet's imaginary value, draining more cash (and power) to the bad guys… Unless RIPE NCC is allowed to enforce strict and regular audits over ressource usage, recover / force transfer of leased ressources and actively fight squatting. Making RPKI (progressively) mandatory for every new - non-transferable - allocations, doing a large-scale sanity check of every past assignements, and refusing IPv4 allocations while no IPv6 is deployed by the solicitator (I mean used, not just announced), will be a good start. RIPE would then be in a position to enforce Best Practices adoption, which would further help the community to run a more stable inter-network. I know how hard could such a policy shift be to accept, but I see it as the only solution to keep the Internet open in the not-so-distant future. ALAS, the legal challenges here are crucial, because RIPE need to take a strong position against the faulty logic leading to accountants and judges value something that is no more than a common agreement over sharing a virtual numeral space. It's even harder with the advent of virtual currencies, where this community's agreement gives value to numbers, where *ours does not*, never did - appart from the mere tolerance of a transfer platform where agreed value is secundary - and never should. Best regards, -- Jérôme Nicolle +33 6 19 31 27 14

1 0

Is mailing list become too small for RIPE?
by Lu Heng 21 Feb '16

21 Feb '16

Hi Guys: With overwhelming mail traffic for past few days, I just realise one thing that I'd like to share with fellow colleagues. Now we have 13,000 members, and keep growing at 2000 member a year, with all those amount of active discussion, maybe maillng is not such a good idea for such big group, maybe Forum(like this one for example http://community.mybb.com/) will do much better in:1. put QnA for new comers, 2. organise discussion better and more readable way.3. let everyone dealing with it while they have time, as i believe Email mostly are more time critical things(at least for me personally, I know I can unscripbe but I do want to follow the discussion but don't want to receive 1000 mail traffic a day from a single list.) Let me know what everybody thinks. -- -- Kind regards. Lu

8 14

Re: [members-discuss] < new LIRs by country > [comms] [ncc-announce] [news] RIPE NCC Members and Multiple
by Matthias Šubik 20 Feb '16

20 Feb '16

> On 19.02.2016, at 14:19, Claudiu Foleanu <claudiu.foleanu(a)tennet.ro> wrote: > > Hi Matthias, > > No, i`m not interested in blaming a country. I already did my research and combined with some other info from this topic you will quickly find that > the low cost of 100 eur for a company in the Uk has already been used. Since 2015 january there is a number of 400 new lir`s added from Uk. > I can provide a list of new equipments (cheap) that are not ipv6 ready. The latest available on the market are Netis routers and equipments witch some of then are not ipv6 ready. And we cannot force the clients to upgrade routers,computers,softwares,phones,sip`s and so on.. > > And btw i don`t think UK is now in a new internet buble or hosting buble or whatever requires ipv4 buble This is an interesting approach: looking on the legal side, separating by country is of course valid. In my first assumption I naïvely thought just look at the plain numbers. But you mention the equipment side: The customer will have to upgrade the router sooner or later, but the regulation should make it about the same time for all of us. so there is not too much negative influence on the market. If some can buy IPs, other can’t, there is a better start with an offset of currency and age of LIR. Therefor we need to tell everybody, that new devices get new, read IPv6-enabled, connections. We can deal with RFC 6598 (CGNAT) for a while, but customer should prefer v6 ready equipment, and we should not wait to actively deliver v6 connectivity. *question to all readers* There are a lot of CGNATed networks, especially with mobile broadband. Hands up who has a public IP on the smart phone, and didn’t ask for it. *thank you* Ask the other LIRs what they see … I can only speak for the market I’m in, and in Austria residential internet products get converted to to CGNAT right now. And the network I’m writing this e-mail from is inside a /13 route (!), but I share this outbound IPv4 with others, and have working v6 connectivity on my desktop. And I’m obviously not in the AS I’m responsible for, as I stated earlier, we are one of the smaller LIRs. We did start with v6, the end was visible when we started buying our equipment. Matthias

2 1

Re: [members-discuss] [ncc-announce] [news] RIPE NCC Members and Multiple LIR Accounts - Please Discuss
by Philippe Bonvin 20 Feb '16

20 Feb '16

Dear all, Thanks to the RIPE for asking this question. Yes I think that multiple LIR accounts are a problem. I don’t see any valid reason to this. The role of the RIPE is to ensure an equal distribution of resources and having multiple LIR accounts doesn’t serve this cause. Selling IP addresses should not exist, in fact the name and address of the RIPE is in every whois queries in their address space ! The address space should be treated as a finite resource that nobody own, we merely have the authorization to use a part of it. If one company merge or split to another, they can ask the RIPE to change the ownership of the resources. Also, if one company want to separate their business activities, they can do it with multiple ASN. There is no technical reason to allow multiple LIR per legal entity. I understand that it is easy to create new companies but in my opinion there should be more restrictions than that : 1. To open a new LIR account, the applicant must follow a welcome course given by the RIPE explaining the good practice. (This would be covered by the opening fees). 2. The new LIR should justify their needs : a. Why they need an ASN and the routing policies (like enforced today) b. How they plan to use their address space (IPv4 and IPv6) 3. Then, the RIPE would assign an ASN and a IPv6 space corresponding the needs plus a margin 4. If the LIR wants to have a /22, then they should prove that the IPv6 space is effectively in use (for example a web server or an smtp server) and that their ASN are multi homed. 5. The /22 should not be transferable at all and should be announced by an ASN of the LIR. 6. The contact person and email address cannot be the same for 2 LIR. With these rules, it should be more difficult but not impossible to open a LIR for having more IPv4 addresses. It seems to me that the RIPE has in the past had a similar workload. Then, the RIPE should bill the LIR for the IP space they have, like it was before. The big LIR contribute financially more than the smaller ones, in the same idea that a big company pays more taxes than a smaller one. The RIPE can concede a reduced IP space fee if the LIR can demonstrate an IPv6 address space effectively in use. This check should be done once a year before the billing. That should help older LIR with only IPv4 to have an IPv6 space announced and to encourage the return of unused IPv4. Best regards Philippe >> Dear colleagues, >> >> The RIPE NCC Executive Board would like to ask the membership to >> discuss >> the issue of RIPE NCC members opening additional LIR accounts. >> >> There were comments at the RIPE NCC General Meeting (GM) in November >> 2015 that members having the ability to open additional LIR >> accounts, >> each of which can request a /22 of IPv4 address space, may run >> against >> the spirit of the last /8 policy. In light of this, the Board >> decided to >> temporarily suspend the ability of RIPE NCC members to open >> additional >> LIR accounts. >> >> The RIPE NCC began to allocate IPv4 address space from the last /8 >> policy on 14 September 2012. Since that time the RIPE NCC has >> allocated >> more than 8,600 /22s, yet there remains 0.94 of a /8 still in the >> pool. >> >> ACTION REQUIRED: >> The Board asks the membership to provide their opinion on and >> discuss >> the following points: >> >> 1. Is the activity of members opening additional LIR accounts a >> problem >> that must be prevented? > Yes, should be prevented. > >> 2. If this activity is a problem that must be prevented, what action >> should the RIPE NCC take to attempt its prevention? > Stop allowing opening multiple LIR account for one legal entity. > >> Statistics pertinent to this discussion are available in this >> article on >> RIPE Labs: >> > https://labs.ripe.net/Members/laura_cobley/ripe-ncc-members-and-multiple-li… <https://labs.ripe.net/Members/laura_cobley/ripe-ncc-members-and-multiple-li…> >> >> The Board asks that members discuss this issue on the Members >> Discuss >> mailing list <members-discuss(a)ripe.net <mailto:members-discuss@ripe.net>>. >> >> The Board will monitor the discussion and will review it at the next >> Executive Board Meeting on 31 March 2016. Depending on the outcome >> of >> that meeting, the Board may propose a resolution for members to vote >> on >> at the RIPE NCC General Meeting in May 2016. >> >> Best regards, >> >> Nigel Titley >> RIPE NCC Executive Board > > If you don't want to receive emails from the RIPE NCC members-discuss > mailing list, please log in to your LIR Portal account and go to the > general page: > https://lirportal.ripe.net/general/ <https://lirportal.ripe.net/general/> > > Click on "Edit my LIR details", under "Subscribed Mailing Lists". From > here, you can add or remove addresses.

1 0

Re: [members-discuss] [comms] [ncc-announce] [news] RIPE NCC, Members and Multiple LIRs
by Sylvain Vallerot 19 Feb '16

19 Feb '16

TL,DR: LIR account control is not related to the last /8 policy which is about allow End Users to get minimal ressources, debate should occur about a policy about the last *assignment* to the new EndUser. Dear all, I'ts been a long time yesterday to read all theses threads about wether or not to continue to allow members to open new LIR accounts. Let 'A' be "wether or not to allow members to open new LIR accounts". We've seen quite quickly that this proposition would be a very poor attemps to avaoid some members to get another /22, disregarding the last /8 policy, since this can be easily achieved another way (creating another company by example). Workarounds exist, some of them quite respectful of the letter of the policy, some but simply cheating and/or providing false information to the Ripe. Facing the poor impact such a measure would have on the real problem that we are strugling with, debates went naturally quite further to try to take other aspects into consideration and try to get a more effective solution thant just A. This has no end, we can't get to a conclusion trying to match A with the last /8 policy because the are not related. Many people here recalled that the last /8 policy spirit (if not the letter) is to allow newcomers to born and get the minimal IPv4 ressource to be able to jumpstart. This is what it is all about. But those newcomers do not have to be LIRs. Thinking that they should is wrong in two ways : forgetting that most companies needing to born outside there are actually EndUsers (yes, our clients quite often), and taking it for granted that a LIR has an ASN, a network, is an IP operateur itself or even an ISP, which is just wrong. But a LIR is *just* an IP distributor benefiting from a special relationship with the Ripe to *serve* its EndUsers. So having a policy like the last /8 read from an ASN or ISP perspective instead of from the EndUser's is quite an abuse of our LIR personality. Now, A is just void, never mind. It has been the occasion for many to contribute and have an oversight of some mechanisms for controlling the distribution of the last /8, and/or ways to cheat. We can use these to think about realistic measures to achieve the real goal. And the real problematic from last /8 policy could be stated like : « how to state distribution rules for the LIRs in order to have them to distribute one and only one /2x per EndUser, and enforce them » /2x to be defined later. Such a statement would help us to have a discussion that has a chance to come to something constructive. This also means a change of paradigms that will quite help : 1. hey LIRs, last IPv4s are not for you. 2. EndUsers back to the center of the Ripe's preocupations 3. limiting a LIR to one or several accounts is void, limiting them to a /22 is void also 4. back to serious and responsible relations between EndUsers and LIRs : EndUsers identities and relations should be seriously documented 5. LIRs back to their distribution role (not consumers), with a clear responsibility about making serious assignments and respect the policy limit per EndUser 6. allocations unlocked but LIR abuse will not be tolerated So, back to a normal working for LIRs that commit to achieve their real function and assume responbility for that. LIRs that mess up their LIR function and their IP operator have already received their last /22. They now for long that IPv4 is not available, and they must move to ipv6 or get IP on the market. LIRs that understand and commit to make a proper distribution to the new EndUsers coming should be able to fullfill their role, under control, but without irrelevant restrictions. Please comment. Best regards, Sylvain -- http://www.opdop.fr - mutualiser et interconnecter en coopérative Opdop - Société Coopérative d'Interêt Collectif sous forme de SARL sur IRC réseau geeknode #opdop - tél: 0950 31 54 74, 06 86 38 38 68

2 2

Re: [members-discuss] < new LIRs by country > [comms] [ncc-announce] [news] RIPE NCC Members and Multiple
by Matthias Šubik 19 Feb '16

19 Feb '16

> On 19.02.2016, at 10:37, Claudiu Foleanu <claudiu.foleanu(a)thorpanel.com> wrote: > ... > I wonder if ripe does not have a report on creation of new lir`s who requested a /22 by country. I think this report will be useful. This would overestimate the role of a country, and ignore the fact that countries differ by size, and differ by LIR per inhabitant already with a heavy contrast. You could say “damn germans / spaniards / whatever”, but is is totally ignoring the size difference. If you would really want that info, just count it, the LIR code is country code based, and the LIR table is downloadable. We had another question on this list “what happens if we need more IPv4 addresses” because of growth. So to realize the size difference, we might need to calculate the growth in internet adoption in the different countries as well. I did not buy no (important) IPv6 incapable equipment for around eight years now. So I doubt there is legitimate growth in v4, except to reuse old equipment (which is just a delay of an investment). And yes, end user prices for v4 might rise as well, this can’t be prevented from now on, maybe just delayed. Matthias

2 1

Re: [members-discuss] Is mailing list become too small for RIPE?
by Lu Heng 19 Feb '16

19 Feb '16

Hi Mathias: Seems few people likes the idea, and consider the outbreak happened few days ago with massive unscripble request, it is obivious that most new member don't even know they ware automatically scribe to this list. NCC please provide an feed-back on the suggestion and maybe, board should discuss it the issue(or it is more of operational matter?) On Fri, Feb 19, 2016 at 1:38 PM, Matthias Šubik <matthias.subik(a)ucnd.at> wrote: > >> On 19.02.2016, at 13:35, Lu Heng <h.lu(a)anytimechinese.com> wrote: >> >> Hi Matthias: >> >> A forum supports Email notification and replies(in which most open >> software nowadays do that), if you dislike forum, you can still follow >> the threads interests you the maillisng list way. > > QED … but we can leave it like that, > we agree to disagree. That’s fine for me. >> >> And for member like me like more passive experience of engagement, >> probably forum the way it is, will do better. > > I agree, but for the point, this doesn’t serve the purpose the list was created for. This is a new idea. > > This e-Mail is not copied to the list, as it probably is a notion of personal preference. Nobody cared enough to reply on the question “why do we have this *list* anyway” … > > take care > Matthias > -- -- Kind regards. Lu

2 2

Re: [members-discuss] [comms] [ncc-announce] [news] RIPE NCC Members and Multiple
by Aleksey Bulgakov 19 Feb '16

19 Feb '16

2 1

Re: [members-discuss] [comms] [ncc-announce] [news] RIPE NCC Members and Multiple
by Thomas Mangin 18 Feb '16

18 Feb '16

As requested … —- Dear Thomas, My name is Claudiu Foleanu from TENNET TELECOM and Interlan Association (We hosted RIPE71 in Romania). I have tried now for a couple of days to post to this topic but for some reason i cannot. I have already mailed ripe-ncc to check this issue. This topic is very important to us and we wish to contribute to it. Can you post this message for me? I have no other solution for this message to reach the members. Thanks so much. Best regards, Claudiu Foleanu ----------------------------------------------- Hi, We in Romania trough Interlan Association are complaining about the issues regarding ipv4 "market" (witch seems to be supported by the community) for over 1 year now. We had a consultant from RIPE in Bucharest and we detailed each and every issue regarding this problem. Ipv4 / Ipv6 was not created for people to make money. It was created to ensure communication between people. Don`t get me wrong, we are not against the market, the unused resources should be redistributed somehow (ripe-ncc,market). But we should take care and ensure that new entities can have IPv4 ip space. RIPE-NCC should request usability reports from every LIR at least once every year. Unused resources should be redistributed. Three times over the last couple of years we have lost ip space witch was rented from other LIR`s. Or had to pay a huge amount of money to transfer them. Three times now we had to renumber and remake the topology of the network in order to support the loss. Why are we not using more IPV6? Facebook is ipv6 akamai,google ok.. Nice. But we have over 10.000 divices routers,switches,etc.. witch do not support ipv6. And we are talking just about customer related devices. Their own home routers,switches,ip phones etc... We should convince China and the manufacturers to build software ipv6 ready! We already tried and it`s not that easy. One manufacturer asked for 200.000 usd in order to redo the software ipv6 ready for some routers. Ask VODAFONE why are they buying ipv4. The answer will be the same. Customers do not have ipv6 ready devices, or they have to many of their own devices ipv6 not ready. You should ask the customers of the LIRS if it was ok to get their ipv4 allocated space taken away by a notification received by email. Big companies should not be allowed to transfer ipv4 to their lir if they do not have at least 30 - 50% implementation on ipv6. We are putting the burden of the costs on the back of start-ups and leaving the big companies to profit on this market. I`m not quite sure what prompted this discussion but i`m glad it`s out! You should look into address space witch left Romania. I can tell you that over 50% at least of that address space was in use. I now get 3 -5 emails each day from small companies in Romania asking for address space. But we have none to give. We have allocated everything in order to try to help! Our solution: You make a new lir to get a /22 ok, then you cannot sell the ip address space. If the lir is for whatever reason closed the ip address space should be requested back. Nobody will create a new lir for a /22 and pay the fees required if the address space given it`s tied to that lir, it will just be to expensive. Best regards, Claudiu Foleanu TENNET TELECOM -----------------------------------------------

18 32

Re: [members-discuss] [ncc-announce] [news] RIPE NCC Members and Multiple LIR Accounts - Please Discuss
by marco＠naefmarco.ch 18 Feb '16

18 Feb '16

Hello RIPE supports reselling of big subnets by providing their Transfer listing service. Those networks shouldn’t be sold. They should be returned to the NCC pool and be assigned to providers who need them. Von: members-discuss [mailto:members-discuss-bounces@ripe.net] Im Auftrag von Pavel Odintsov Gesendet: Donnerstag, 11. Februar 2016 15:42 An: Radu Brebu <dial(a)dialcube.ro> Cc: members-discuss(a)ripe.net Betreff: Re: [members-discuss] [ncc-announce] [news] RIPE NCC Members and Multiple LIR Accounts - Please Discuss Hello, folks! That's good conversation. I'm representing VPS service company. We bought multiple /20 and /21 subnets at last 2 years. But actually there really big injustice exists here! I've followed all RIPE guidance and request resources only when they really required for next 3-6 months. I have 95% subnet utilization in each network! All my IP addresses really used. But I known so much LIR's who just ignore RIPE rules and requested bunch of /18, /16 networks many years ago.... just because they can. Right now almost all this networks are on IPv4 market. And I should pay my money to persons which violated RIPE rules for a long time. Than't really weird, isn't it? On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 5:34 PM, Radu Brebu <dial(a)dialcube.ro <mailto:dial@dialcube.ro> > wrote: Hi all, This is a socialist way of thinking, you are free (ipotetic speaking) to open another lir and satisfy your VPS needs no? some companies prefer to plan their business long term. In my opinion it's not ok to prioritize resources keeping in mind only the need. We are leaving and doing business in a capitalist environment, buying resources it is what is all about. On 02/11/16 16:19, José Manuel Giner wrote: I agree with it. We need IPs to continue providing VPS servers, and other LIRs with unused prefixes, no sense... On 11/02/2016 15:09, Aleksey Bulgakov wrote: Hi, all. I think, it is better to return unused allocations, received before 2012, to the NCC pool. -- Kind regards, Aleksey Bulgakov FastTelecom, CEO 7 926 6908729 14:02, 11 февраля 2016 г., Nigel Titley : Dear colleagues, The RIPE NCC Executive Board would like to ask the membership to discuss the issue of RIPE NCC members opening additional LIR accounts. There were comments at the RIPE NCC General Meeting (GM) in November 2015 that members having the ability to open additional LIR accounts, each of which can request a /22 of IPv4 address space, may run against the spirit of the last /8 policy. In light of this, the Board decided to temporarily suspend the ability of RIPE NCC members to open additional LIR accounts. The RIPE NCC began to allocate IPv4 address space from the last /8 policy on 14 September 2012. Since that time the RIPE NCC has allocated more than 8,600 /22s, yet there remains 0.94 of a /8 still in the pool. ACTION REQUIRED: The Board asks the membership to provide their opinion on and discuss the following points: 1. Is the activity of members opening additional LIR accounts a problem that must be prevented? 2. If this activity is a problem that must be prevented, what action should the RIPE NCC take to attempt its prevention? Statistics pertinent to this discussion are available in this article on RIPE Labs: https://labs.ripe.net/Members/laura_cobley/ripe-ncc-members-and-multiple-li… <https://labs.ripe.net/Members/laura_cobley/ripe-ncc-members-and-multiple-li…> &pk_kwd=list-ncc The Board asks that members discuss this issue on the Members Discuss mailing list . The Board will monitor the discussion and will review it at the next Executive Board Meeting on 31 March 2016. Depending on the outcome of that meeting, the Board may propose a resolution for members to vote on at the RIPE NCC General Meeting in May 2016. Best regards, Nigel Titley RIPE NCC Executive Board ---- If you don't want to receive emails from the RIPE NCC members-discuss mailing list, please log in to your LIR Portal account and go to the general page: https://lirportal.ripe.net/general/ Click on "Edit my LIR details", under "Subscribed Mailing Lists". From here, you can add or remove addresses. ---- If you don't want to receive emails from the RIPE NCC members-discuss mailing list, please log in to your LIR Portal account and go to the general page: https://lirportal.ripe.net/general/ Click on "Edit my LIR details", under "Subscribed Mailing Lists". From here, you can add or remove addresses. -- Sincerely yours, Pavel Odintsov CTO, FastVPS Eesti OU

14 19

Re: [members-discuss] [ncc-announce] [news] RIPE NCC Members and Multiple LIR Accounts - Please Discuss
by lir＠di-net.ru 18 Feb '16

18 Feb '16

First of all, I think we all should agree that current debates are all about abusing LIR creation procedure to get extra IPs. Why some percent of members was trying to explain here their reasons why they can't use IPv6. Relatively to the main discussion in short: I believe we can do nothing to prevent different types of abusing for a 'long distance'. They've asked whether the activity of members opening additional LIR accounts is a problem that must be prevented? Sure it is, RIPE can block requests from existing LIRs, or add some extra payments for such procedure. The second option actually is nothing but a small delay to the times until the prices for IPv4 will be higher than LIR charges. As mentioned earlier, if we just block an ability to create LIR for an existing member, it's definitely not a problem to register new companies. It is not even necessary to create a new company, almost everyone can open paint application and create all needed documents. RIPE has no ability to validate somehow whether the documents are juridical correct or not, including merging/sell documents. The principles of honesty, responsibility and reasonableness are fading when money comes to play. IPv4 address space is already monetized and we can't fight with or deny this fact. Besides, I don't agree that any types of audit can help here. This procedure requires huge effort not only from RIPE employees but from LIR engineers too, in large LIRs it may be prolonged for indeterminable time. Estimating effectiveness of every particular LIR address space and attempts to retrieve some IPv4, could lead RIPE to become a regulator not a coordinator. It's a good idea to check ARIN policies applied to their last block, and may be adopt some paragraphs. Some basic principles that are emphasized: - Documentation, network schemes and so on are strongly required for any allocation. In contrast with ARIN, RIPE just give /22 to any new member. - Necessity to provide data demonstrating utilization of this space (immediately and after one year) Summarizing all above, I think RIPE should prevent any IPv4 address allocations (including new LIR members) without complete plans, schemes and demonstrations of necessity and effectiveness. May be RIPE can afford one dedicated engineer being responsible for analyze such plans. Still it must be clear that complete IPv4 exhaustion is just the question of time, no matter how hard RIPE put the screws on allocation procedure. Alex Klimenko Digital Network NOC

1 0

Re: [members-discuss] [comms] [ncc-announce] [news] RIPE NCC Members and Multiple
by Александр Клименко 18 Feb '16

18 Feb '16

First of all, I think we all should agree that current debates are all about abusing LIR creation procedure to get extra IPs. Why some percent of members was trying to explain here their reasons why they can't use IPv6. Relatively to the main discussion in short: I believe we can do nothing to prevent different types of abusing for a 'long distance'. They've asked whether the activity of members opening additional LIR accounts is a problem that must be prevented? Sure it is, RIPE can block requests from existing LIRs, or add some extra payments for such procedure. The second option actually is nothing but a small delay to the times until the prices for IPv4 will be higher than LIR charges. As mentioned earlier, if we just block an ability to create LIR for an existing member, it's definitely not a problem to register new companies. It is not even necessary to create a new company, almost everyone can open paint application and create all needed documents. RIPE has no ability to validate somehow whether the documents are juridical correct or not, including merging/sell documents. The principles of honesty, responsibility and reasonableness are fading when money comes to play. IPv4 address space is already monetized and we can't fight with or deny this fact. Besides, I don't agree that any types of audit can help here. This procedure requires huge effort not only from RIPE employees but from LIR engineers too, in large LIRs it may be prolonged for indeterminable time. Estimating effectiveness of every particular LIR address space and attempts to retrieve some IPv4, could lead RIPE to become a regulator not a coordinator. It's a good idea to check ARIN policies applied to their last block, and may be adopt some paragraphs. Some basic principles that are emphasized: - Documentation, network schemes and so on are strongly required for any allocation. In contrast with ARIN, RIPE just give /22 to any new member. - Necessity to provide data demonstrating utilization of this space (immediately and after one year) Summarizing all above, I think RIPE should prevent any IPv4 address allocations (including new LIR members) without complete plans, schemes and demonstrations of necessity and effectiveness. May be RIPE can afford one dedicated engineer being responsible for analyze such plans. Still it must be clear that complete IPv4 exhaustion is just the question of time, no matter how hard RIPE put the screws on allocation procedure. Alex Klimenko Digital Network

1 0

parrot on the list
by Matthias Šubik 18 Feb '16

18 Feb '16

Hello, can anybody stop support(a)polycomm.net from resending any e-Mail it receives? It is an annoying parrot. thanks Matthias

1 0

Re: [members-discuss] [Polycomm] (TS-221) [ncc-announce] [news] RIPE NCC Members and Multiple LIR Accounts - Please Discuss
by Anthony Somerset 18 Feb '16

18 Feb '16

to come back to the debate about multiple LIR’s and ip space, let me play devil’s advocate for a second :) why don’t we want to allow final IPv4 space to be consumed as quickly as reasonably possible reserving only some final space as required for critical infrastructure needs? (critical infrastructure might be considered as things like as internet exchange points or verified root DNS servers etc) Yes this would drive up the grey/black market prices and there will be some people that take advantage of this and find creative ways around the various soft landing policies in place globally (this problem isn’t unique to RIPE specifically) for a quick $£ etc however the flip side of this is an enforced shortage of IPv4 because of its consumption will also force people to actually act on getting onto IPv6 properly once and for all. lets not try and prolong the life of a terminally ill patient that is IPv4 - lets give it the IP/Networking equivalent of a Do Not Resuscitate and just let it run out and focus our efforts on building proper IPv6 plans and rolling them out and supporting the IPv6 transition methods like 6to4-PT or similar the increasing price of IPv4 address is really a short to medium term problem because the market would ultimately reach a limit where its much more financially viable to roll out IPv6 network upgrades and infrastructure if not existing already than to purchase grey IP's Anthony Somerset, Technical Director, w: cloudunboxed.net <http://www.cloudunboxed.net/> | e: anthony.somerset(a)cloudunboxed.net <mailto:anthony.somerset@cloudunboxed.net> | t: +44 (0)33 0088 2444 Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail. This e-mail and any attachments are confidential and intended for the addressed individual or entity only. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately and then discard this e-mail. Unauthorized copying, sharing and distributing of this e-mail is prohibited. The content in this e-mail does not necessarily represent the views of the company. The addressee should check all attachments for malware; the company makes no representation as regards the absence of malware in attachments to this e-mail. > On 17 Feb,2016, at 16:31, Jivko Jelev <support(a)polycomm.net> wrote: > > Jivko Jelev <http://www.crm.polycomm.net/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=j.jelev%40itnsglob…> обновил запрос > > Техническая поддержка <http://www.crm.polycomm.net/browse/TS> / <http://www.crm.polycomm.net/browse/TS-221> TS-221 <http://www.crm.polycomm.net/browse/TS-221> > [members-discuss] [ncc-announce] [news] RIPE NCC Members and Multiple LIR Accounts - Please Discuss <http://www.crm.polycomm.net/browse/TS-221> > I think is more beter this market to be close no reason to sale ip > space. !!! > RIPE Must take back this free ip space and on standat procedure give > space to LIR providers whit clear rule-s .... > For exsample big providers have alot of ip space Class B networks and > they rent and sell this ip space. This bring to them a big profit. If > you are new LIR you have only one option take space from market. no any > option to take makert in country where this LIR have custumers. > We try to use ipv6 .... for exsample no skype no any web site-s in local > peering only one option is NAT for ipv4 .... > On 17-Feb-16 4:18 PM, Matthias Šubik wrote: > >> On 17.02.2016, at 14:55, David Ponzone <david.ponzone(a)ipeva.fr> wrote: > >> > > .. > >> PS: I see there are some ticketing systems registered as members of the ML. I am receiving quite some garbage when I post and it seems some people are getting the mails although they are not even members of the ML. > > I guess RIPE contact leaving the company, and e-Mail address gets assigned to the support queue. > > And the helldesk has to close the tickets, > > does not have the authority / idea to unsubscribe. > > > > Matthias > > ps: If there are company mergers behind that, it isn’t so easy to find out which address needs unsubscribing, if it isn’t mentioned in the footer. > > ---- > > If you don't want to receive emails from the RIPE NCC members-discuss > > mailing list, please log in to your LIR Portal account and go to the general page: > > https://lirportal.ripe.net/general/ <https://lirportal.ripe.net/general/> > > > > Click on "Edit my LIR details", under "Subscribed Mailing Lists". From here, you can add or remove addresses. > – > Jivko Jelev > General Manager ITNS Global - Bulgaria > T/F +359 2 49 66 555 > US/T +1 4044001713 > M +359 88 5555122,+359 87 8553844 > e-mail: j.jelev(a)itnsglobal.eu > If you don't want to receive emails from the RIPE NCC members-discuss > mailing list, please log in to your LIR Portal account and go to the general page: > https://lirportal.ripe.net/general/ <https://lirportal.ripe.net/general/> > Click on "Edit my LIR details", under "Subscribed Mailing Lists". From here, you can add or remove addresses. > <Mail Attachment.png> <http://www.crm.polycomm.net/browse/TS-221#add-comment> Добавить комментарий <http://www.crm.polycomm.net/browse/TS-221#add-comment> > > Это сообщение автоматически генерируется JIRA. (v6.4.1#64016-sha1:5d75814) > <Mail Attachment.png>

3 3

Re: [members-discuss] [comms] [ncc-announce] [news] RIPE NCC Members and Multiple
by Brandon Butterworth 18 Feb '16

18 Feb '16

> Finding a solution that doesn't mean a huge increase in > administrative work for the NCC or making the request procedure almost > impossible for new LIR's is not a solution. Just make the price higher than the market rate, the speculators will go elsewhere. The new LIR will have to pay market rate for any further space anyway so should plan accordingly I'd rather all this was not needed but if there is a game people will play it. Nobody should be surprised brandon

2 1

Re: [members-discuss] [comms] [ncc-announce] [news] RIPE NCC Members and Multiple
by Sylvain Vallerot 18 Feb '16

18 Feb '16

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 Hi, On 17/02/2016 16:15, Claudiu Foleanu wrote: > Like i said to the consultant, ripe ncc never notified an end user and told > him that the lir can take the allocated space back. Obviously a very perverse consequence of the abandon of the public ressource to this market. I do not see any other solution for you than to go into justice because of an obviously unfair behavior of your provider. Regarding the Ripe policies, maybe we should try to prevent this by having the previous user of a given range to have some precedence for buying the range, if the LIR is willing to transfer it. And price should be very low compared to the market, otherwise this is door opening to extorsion. This would prevent, if not such speculative misbehaviors, at least disastrous situations for the End Users. Another option would be to apply penalties of some kind when a LIR breaks such a contract (meaning, an IP lease contract, not related to other services). Best regards, S. Vallerot - -- http://www.opdop.fr - mutualiser et interconnecter en coopérative Opdop - Société Coopérative d'Interêt Collectif sous forme de SARL sur IRC réseau geeknode #opdop - tél: 0950 31 54 74, 06 86 38 38 68 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1 iF4EAREIAAYFAlbFyBcACgkQJBGsD8mtnRGergD9EwZupPTy8xmaKhUXghFDz59g YoFV7p2J6/P1Ds5i4+QA/2+txMjuNnePzyOTjw/X1soteqO75/pkaMPl5kGMC+Lw =RTwZ -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

Re: [members-discuss] [Polycomm] (TS-223) Re: [comms] [ncc-announce] [news] RIPE NCC Members and Multiple
by ian smith 18 Feb '16

18 Feb '16

Hi Sebastian, by definition, "unintended consequences" are also unforeseen consequences, so I cannot give examples for any changes that may be made. However, unintended consequences are unfortunately a very common occurrence when rules are changed. Ian > Message Title > Sebastian Wiesinger > <http://www.crm.polycomm.net/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=sebastian.wiesinge…> > *обновил* запрос > > Техническая поддержка <http://www.crm.polycomm.net/browse/TS> / > Обращение <http://www.crm.polycomm.net/browse/TS-223> TS-223 > <http://www.crm.polycomm.net/browse/TS-223> > Re: [members-discuss] [comms] [ncc-announce] [news] RIPE NCC Members > and Multiple <http://www.crm.polycomm.net/browse/TS-223> > > * Ian Smith <ian(a)lothianbroadband.com> [2016-02-18 13:07]: > > I'm concerned about the direction this discussion is taking because > > it seems to be focusing on the behaviour of a tiny minority of > > members. The majority of us would welcome the ability to obtain > > another /22 or two for legitimate purposes. > > But that is not the intention of the policy. You get one /22 so that > others can get one too. I'm sure everyone would welcome the ability to > get more IPv4 but we're all out. It's over. Move on. > > > Any changes made to combat practices of a tiny minority of members > > may have unintended consequences for many and impact on small LIR's > > like mine. > > Which unintended consequences are there? All consequences that I've > heard about are absolutely intentional. (Do not let people receive > more than one /22). > > Regards > > Sebastian > > – > noris network AG - Thomas-Mann-Straße 16-20 - D-90471 Nürnberg > Tel +49-911-9352-1335 - Fax +49-911-9352-100 > > http://www.noris.de - The IT-Outsourcing Company > > Vorstand: Ingo Kraupa (Vorsitzender), Joachim Astel - > Vorsitzender des Aufsichtsrats: Stefan Schnabel - AG Nürnberg HRB 17689 > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > If you don't want to receive emails from the RIPE NCC members-discuss > mailing list, please log in to your LIR Portal account and go to the > general page: > https://lirportal.ripe.net/general/ > > Click on "Edit my LIR details", under "Subscribed Mailing Lists". From > here, you can add or remove addresses. > > Добавить комментарий > <http://www.crm.polycomm.net/browse/TS-223#add-comment> Добавить > комментарий <http://www.crm.polycomm.net/browse/TS-223#add-comment> > > Это сообщение автоматически генерируется JIRA. > (v6.4.1#64016-sha1:5d75814) > Atlassian logo >

1 0

Re: [members-discuss] [ncc-announce] [news] RIPE NCC Members and Multiple LIR Accounts - Please Discuss
by Gunnar Guðvarðarson 18 Feb '16

18 Feb '16

1. Yes 2. Make it so that any /22 allocated from "the last /8" is non-transferrible if allocated after a specific date, ever. That way, if a LIR requests a /22 the subnet is bound to that LIR, if the LIR then wants to merge with another company it must return the /22. That way any abuse becomes a very expensive thing to maintain. And of course require a working IPv6 allocation before assigning anything from IPv4. ---- Dear colleagues, The RIPE NCC Executive Board would like to ask the membership to discuss the issue of RIPE NCC members opening additional LIR accounts. There were comments at the RIPE NCC General Meeting (GM) in November 2015 that members having the ability to open additional LIR accounts, each of which can request a /22 of IPv4 address space, may run against the spirit of the last /8 policy. In light of this, the Board decided to temporarily suspend the ability of RIPE NCC members to open additional LIR accounts. The RIPE NCC began to allocate IPv4 address space from the last /8 policy on 14 September 2012. Since that time the RIPE NCC has allocated more than 8,600 /22s, yet there remains 0.94 of a /8 still in the pool. ACTION REQUIRED: The Board asks the membership to provide their opinion on and discuss the following points: 1. Is the activity of members opening additional LIR accounts a problem that must be prevented? 2. If this activity is a problem that must be prevented, what action should the RIPE NCC take to attempt its prevention? Statistics pertinent to this discussion are available in this article on RIPE Labs: https://labs.ripe.net/Members/laura_cobley/ripe-ncc-members-and-multiple-li… The Board asks that members discuss this issue on the Members Discuss mailing list . The Board will monitor the discussion and will review it at the next Executive Board Meeting on 31 March 2016. Depending on the outcome of that meeting, the Board may propose a resolution for members to vote on at the RIPE NCC General Meeting in May 2016. Best regards, Nigel Titley RIPE NCC Executive Board ~ Gunnar

4 4

audit idea .... improve database quality
by Matthias Šubik 18 Feb '16

18 Feb '16

Hello, to add to my previous idea, to add the subscribed e-Mail address to the footer, I would suggest all LIRs, which obviously don’t know they are a LIR, and how to unsubscribe to be placed on the audit short list. When I was in an RIPE audit, I was shocked about the basic level of the questions asked, but now I know why. There must be hundreds of LIRs without any(more) personnel with a RIPE course. How can this LIRs deliver up to date WHOIS information, including abuse/cert/irt contact? This is no witch hunt, I can recommend to any LIR personell to take a RIPE NCC training course. This can explain the inner working of the RIPE NCC, the voting process, the database, and exactly why we have this mailing list. Additionally I assume none of this LIRs has any IPv6 plans. They might not even know there is a need for change. As their allocation is working for them (like internal LIRs in large cooperations). all the best Matthias

6 6

Re: [members-discuss] [ncc-announce] [news] RIPE NCC Members and Multiple LIR Accounts - Please Discuss
by Riccardo Gori 18 Feb '16

18 Feb '16

Hi all, Ni Nigel, Sorry for the late reply I tried to post my opinion days ago but there was an issue with subcription on the list. I think 2015-01 did the most. I would tune that with audit and I would forbit transfert of never annouced address space. Short answer for busy or lazy readers ;-) Here you are my opinion: 1. Is the activity of members opening additional LIR accounts a problem that must be prevented? Yes. It has been abused in a speculative way. During late 2014 and all 2015 some legal entities used it to obtain address space from /8 and immediately sell it to market. There was a loophole in the policy. This is not more possible thanks to 2015-01 discussed and approved on address-policy-wg. There was a plenty of abusing even before september 2012. Wall of shame is there. No one is shamed though. I want you to notice that if you analyze the ripe allocation list you can find similar behavior happened even before when policies were completely different Single legal entinty with multiple LIR account requested and obtained allocation greater as /18 or /16 for each LIR account they owned. Some of the allocation are still there and it's easy to check with date allocation, some maybe were transferred and are not easy to track. 2. If this activity is a problem that must be prevented, what action should the RIPE NCC take to attempt its prevention? We should attempt prevention but it's not easy. But we can consider some options: - Stop allowing opening multiple LIR account for one legal entity. Easy but irrelevant, will reach but it's easy to cheat already said from many of us. - Add more disincentive with a 5 years holing time before for all transfer. Very difficul to reach rough consensus many LIR are holding a lot of unused address space. They will expose their castle to Ipv6 adoption rate... - Returing allocated and unused: Mostly impossible. Anyway I would like to see what would happen to stockpiled IPs if memership fee were IP/monthly based. May result in cheaper transferts, cheaper leases, more LIRs doing their work, more internet. Very interesting. - Audit We had a large surplus in 2015 instead of redestributing it (this made even higher the surplus of speculators) we can consider to use it for audit. In this case we can allow multiple LIR per legal entity beacause it would been ever easier to indentify when the behavior becomes strange. If they have customers they will have assignements, IPs will be in use, IPs will be announced, database is consistent I don't see any abuse here. It something is wrong RIPE will terminate the LIR for violations or other reason as in SSA and resources will be back to the available pool. - Forbit transfert of "never annouced" address space. Maybe difficult to reach consensum but I don't like to see in IPv4 Transfer Listin Service best offers for "never annouced address space". This is sure comes from stockpiling or quick buck speculators. I think 2015-01 did the most. I would tune that with audit and I would forbit transfert of never annouced address space. kind regards Riccardo -- Ing. Riccardo Gori e-mail:rgori@wirem.net WIREM Fiber Revolution Net-IT s.r.l. Via Cesare Montanari, 2 47521 Cesena (FC) Tel +39 0547 1955485 Fax +39 0547 1950285 -------------------------------------------------------------------- CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE This message and its attachments are addressed solely to the persons above and may contain confidential information. If you have received the message in error, be informed that any use of the content hereof is prohibited. Please return it immediately to the sender and delete the message. Should you have any questions, please contact us by re- plying toinfo(a)wirem.net Thank you WIREM - Net-IT s.r.l.Via Cesare Montanari, 2 - 47521 Cesena (FC) --------------------------------------------------------------------

1 0

About unsubscribing
by Jérôme Nicolle 18 Feb '16

18 Feb '16

Hi folks, I'm currently going through all the recent posts on this mailing list, that have been moved to a dedicated subfolder on my mailbox thanks to sieve (RFC 5228) rules. We're having a fundamental discussion here. It's all about, as members of a NFP organisation, we're trying to set rules to behave as members of the Internet community. Asking for beeing spared of the current threads is resignating for your LIR status, and memebership frome RIPE NCC. It implies asking for the return of your numbered assignement to the available pool, too. Thanks for that. You can't seriously be an ISP and ask to avoid the current conversation. Either you relenquish every assignement,and your LIR status, or take part in the building process of the next generation of our comminuty's policies. So, once again, please relenquish your assigned IP space or take part in the current process. Or ask to be spared and GTFO. Best regards, -- Jérôme Nicolle +33 6 19 31 27 14

1 0

Moderation Enabled on Members-Discuss
by Serge Radovcic 17 Feb '16

17 Feb '16

Dear colleagues, We’ve noticed that the large amount of emails asking to unsubscribe has been detracting from the discussion on this list. We have therefore turned on moderation and will not be letting through any more emails until tomorrow at the earliest. If you would like to unsubscribe, you can do this through the LIR Portal. Log in to your LIR Portal account and go to the general page: https://lirportal.ripe.net/general/ Click on “Edit my LIR details” under “Subscribed Mailing Lists” and from here you can add or remove email addresses. ***It is important to note: any subscription changes made in the LIR Portal may take up to 24 hours to be processed. If you have already updated this information, the change will happen in this timeframe*** If you have any questions, please email <ncc(a)ripe.net>. Once this issue is resolved, we hope we can return to the important member discussion on the multiple LIR issue. We trust that this interruption won’t have too much of an impact on the community’s discussion, as it is not immediately time sensitive. Kind regards Serge Radovcic Chief Communications Officer RIPE NCC

1 0

Please remove me from discussion list
by Thierry Durieux - Neo-One 17 Feb '16

17 Feb '16

Please remove me from discussion list Salutations. -- Thierry Durieux Directeur Technique Téléphone: 05 67 34 67 90 | Support: 09 70 75 37 40 8 chemin de la terrasse - BP 45122, 31512 Toulouse Cedex [cid:image001.png@01CF96D9.2F09BA30]

2 1

remove from disscusion email list
by Omar Dallah 17 Feb '16

17 Feb '16

Dears, Please remove my email from the discussion email list. BTW I removed my email by LIR portal but still receiving the discussion emails. Please help. Regards, Omar Dallah From: members-discuss [mailto:members-discuss-bounces@ripe.net] On Behalf Of Matthijs van Seventer Sent: 17 February 2016 16:58 To: BOGDAN Orasanu; 'Markus'; members-discuss(a)ripe.net; Claudiu Foleanu Subject: Re: [members-discuss] [comms] [ncc-announce] [news] RIPE NCC Members and Multiple Hello all, LIR’s that don’t use IPv4 adresses should be able to return them. The only parties that will win otherwise are brokers with ridiculous prices. Matthijs Van: members-discuss [mailto:members-discuss-bounces@ripe.net] Namens BOGDAN Orasanu Verzonden: woensdag 17 februari 2016 15:53 Aan: 'Markus' <universe(a)truemetal.org>; members-discuss(a)ripe.net; Claudiu Foleanu <claudiu.foleanu(a)thorpanel.com> Onderwerp: Re: [members-discuss] [comms] [ncc-announce] [news] RIPE NCC Members and Multiple Hi there, I administer such a small ISP, that had to return somehow by force half of the allocated IP addreses. This way of doing bussiness should not be encouraged by RIPE, i instead of RIPE will ask a huge LIR that managed milions of IP addresses how come they were able to transfer maybe half of them ? They were only reserved and not used ? Or eliberated of usage thtought some means in order to capitalise ? LIR should be able to manage respurces only toward end user and not among LIRs exept and ISP that want to manage their own address space and not for trade. The resource belongs to public not to lirs. Best regards, Bogdan Orasanu Senior Network Administrator SC Expert Net SRL Sent from my Sony Xperia™ smartphone ---- Claudiu Foleanu wrote ---- Hi Markus, The lir send`s a document to the company in wich says "As per end user contract signed you have 3 months to stop using resources" and after this the resources are sold. It happend to a lot (and i do mean a lot) of companies in Romania. I think that Romania is number one in number of resources (ipv4 address space) sold. And as i said in my previous email most of them have been in use. I have a /22 witch is in IRAN now. Sold to an Iranian telecom company by the lir. I have not received any previous notification. Our callcenter just started getting calls about internet not working. We did not imagine that someone will do something like this. We addressed this issue with ripe-ncc at that time and the reply was find a new lir we cannot help in the matter. We should ask a report for tickets created from Romania regarding address space from Romania with the same issue. Best regards, Claudiu Foleanu -----Original Message----- From: members-discuss [mailto:members-discuss-bounces@ripe.net] On Behalf Of Markus Sent: Wednesday, February 17, 2016 4:37 PM To: members-discuss(a)ripe.net; Claudiu Foleanu Subject: Re: [members-discuss] [comms] [ncc-announce] [news] RIPE NCC Members and Multiple Hi Claudiu, Am 17.02.2016 um 15:26 schrieb Claudiu Foleanu: > No it`s not bad to sell ip`s. It`s bad that the people are abusing the > system. It`s bad that small companies that had a /22 a /24 etc.. have > the resources allocated taken away, and sold for profit. [...] can you elaborate on how these small companies have resources taken away from them? I can't imagine how that works. Who forces these companies to give their resources up? I've noticed that a company called "IPv4 Management SRL" (www.ip.ro) from your country is selling a lot of smaller IPv4 blocks like all the time. It seems like they are the predominant seller in the RIPE market judging from <https://www.ripe.net/manage-ips-and-asns/resource-transfers-and-mergers/tra nsfers/ipv4/ipv4-transfer-statistics> Do they have something to do with what you described? Cheers Markus ---- If you don't want to receive emails from the RIPE NCC members-discuss mailing list, please log in to your LIR Portal account and go to the general page: https://lirportal.ripe.net/general/ Click on "Edit my LIR details", under "Subscribed Mailing Lists". From here, you can add or remove addresses. ---- If you don't want to receive emails from the RIPE NCC members-discuss mailing list, please log in to your LIR Portal account and go to the general page: https://lirportal.ripe.net/general/ Click on "Edit my LIR details", under "Subscribed Mailing Lists". From here, you can add or remove addresses.

29 29

Removing from the Mailinglist
by Patrick Velder 17 Feb '16

17 Feb '16

Hi Could you please stop sending your removal requests to all subscribers of this list? For some reasons, the LIR Portal exists. Thank you very much. Regards Patrick

1 0

remove
by Zurab Bukhnikashvili 17 Feb '16

17 Feb '16

Please remove me from discussion list Best regards, Zurab Bukhnikashvili Network Administrator Georgian Research and Educational Networking Association 10 Chovelidze Str. 0108, Tbilisi, Georgia, Phone: + 995 32 2250590 Fax: + 995 32 2912952 <http://www.grena.ge/> www.grena.ge

3 2

How to unsubscribe
by IT 17 Feb '16

17 Feb '16

To unsubscribe: mailto:members-discuss-request@ripe.net?subject=unsubscribe (unless RIPE hacked mailman) Met vriendelijke groet / With kind regards, Maarten Dammers Netwerk Expert Roberto Ubeda Platforms IT(a)jscingenium.com<mailto:IT@jscingenium.com> JSC Ingenium Condesa de Venadito 1, 28027 Madrid (Spain). Office 902 095 045 Fax 902 095 046 JSC Ingenium web page<http://www.jscingenium.com/> JSC Ingenium company blog<http://blog.jscingenium.com/>

1 0

Remove me
by Nizamuddin Khawaja 17 Feb '16

17 Feb '16

Please remove me from this list

5 4

Re: [members-discuss] [comms] [ncc-announce] [news] RIPE NCC Members and Multiple
by BOGDAN Orasanu 17 Feb '16

17 Feb '16

Hi there, I administer such a small ISP, that had to return somehow by force half of the allocated IP addreses. This way of doing bussiness should not be encouraged by RIPE, i instead of RIPE will ask a huge LIR that managed milions of IP addresses how come they were able to transfer maybe half of them ? They were only reserved and not used ? Or eliberated of usage thtought some means in order to capitalise ? LIR should be able to manage respurces only toward end user and not among LIRs exept and ISP that want to manage their own address space and not for trade. The resource belongs to public not to lirs. Best regards, Bogdan Orasanu Senior Network Administrator SC Expert Net SRL Sent from my Sony Xperia™ smartphone ---- Claudiu Foleanu wrote ---- >Hi Markus, > >The lir send`s a document to the company in wich says "As per end user >contract signed you have 3 months to stop using resources" and after this >the resources are sold. >It happend to a lot (and i do mean a lot) of companies in Romania. I think >that Romania is number one in number of resources (ipv4 address space) sold. >And as i said in my previous email most of them have been in use. I have a >/22 witch is in IRAN now. Sold to an Iranian telecom company by the lir. I >have not received any previous notification. Our callcenter just started >getting calls about internet not working. We did not imagine that someone >will do something like this. >We addressed this issue with ripe-ncc at that time and the reply was find a >new lir we cannot help in the matter. >We should ask a report for tickets created from Romania regarding address >space from Romania with the same issue. > >Best regards, >Claudiu Foleanu > > > >-----Original Message----- >From: members-discuss [mailto:members-discuss-bounces@ripe.net] On Behalf Of >Markus >Sent: Wednesday, February 17, 2016 4:37 PM >To: members-discuss(a)ripe.net; Claudiu Foleanu >Subject: Re: [members-discuss] [comms] [ncc-announce] [news] RIPE NCC >Members and Multiple > >Hi Claudiu, > >Am 17.02.2016 um 15:26 schrieb Claudiu Foleanu: >> No it`s not bad to sell ip`s. It`s bad that the people are abusing the >> system. It`s bad that small companies that had a /22 a /24 etc.. have >> the resources allocated taken away, and sold for profit. >[...] > >can you elaborate on how these small companies have resources taken away >from them? I can't imagine how that works. Who forces these companies to >give their resources up? > >I've noticed that a company called "IPv4 Management SRL" (www.ip.ro) from >your country is selling a lot of smaller IPv4 blocks like all the time. It >seems like they are the predominant seller in the RIPE market judging from ><https://www.ripe.net/manage-ips-and-asns/resource-transfers-and-mergers/tra >nsfers/ipv4/ipv4-transfer-statistics> > >Do they have something to do with what you described? > >Cheers >Markus > > > > > > > > > >---- >If you don't want to receive emails from the RIPE NCC members-discuss >mailing list, please log in to your LIR Portal account and go to the general >page: >https://lirportal.ripe.net/general/ > >Click on "Edit my LIR details", under "Subscribed Mailing Lists". From here, >you can add or remove addresses. > > >---- >If you don't want to receive emails from the RIPE NCC members-discuss >mailing list, please log in to your LIR Portal account and go to the general page: >https://lirportal.ripe.net/general/ > >Click on "Edit my LIR details", under "Subscribed Mailing Lists". From here, you can add or remove addresses. >

6 5

How to unsubscribe
by Info - WirNEXT . 17 Feb '16

17 Feb '16

Please remove me from this list -- *Informazioni *| NEXT SRL - Via Lombardia, 55 - 00012 Guidonia (RM) | Tel. 0774.764513 Il contenuto di questa email e gli eventuali allegati, è strettamente confidenziale, non producibile in giudizio e destinato alla/e persona/e a cui è indirizzato. Se avete ricevuto per errore questa email, Vi preghiamo di segnalarcelo immediatamente e di cancellarla dal vostro computer. E' fatto divieto di copiare e divulgare il contenuto di questa email. Ogni utilizzo abusivo delle informazioni qui contenute da parte di persone terze o comunque non indicate nella presente email, potrà essere perseguito ai sensi di legge. Si informa che per l'esercizio dei diritti previsti dall'art.7, D.lgs. 196/2003, è possibile rivolgersi al seguente indirizzo: privacy(a)wirnext.com

2 1

Please remove me from this list----
by Heiko Moeller 17 Feb '16

17 Feb '16

Please remove me from all lists--- Mit freundlichen Grüßen Heiko Möller Provider Management GLS IT Services GmbH GLS Germany Strasse 1-7 36286 Neuenstein Germany T +49 (0) 66 77 17 471 F +49 (0) 66 77 17 486 E heiko.moeller(a)gls-itservices.com ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ GLS IT Services GmbH Sitz: Neuenstein, Amtsgericht Bad Hersfeld HRB 388, Geschäftsführer: Christian Herrlich, Thorsten Pruin ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

2 1

Re: [members-discuss] FW: remove from disscusion email list
by iODC Hostmaster 17 Feb '16

17 Feb '16

Moved to Spamhaus and SNDS - thats how it concerns users, who do not wish to be on the list, nor ever signed up to the list. Med venlig hilsen / Best regards NOC [iODC Logo] In & Outbound Datacenter Arnold Nielsens Boulevard 62B, 2650 Hvidovre, Danmark Telefon: 6913 6920, Vagt: 6913 6940 ronnie(a)iodc.dk<mailto:ronnie@iodc.dk> | iodc.dk<http://iodc.dk/> | ssdvps.dk<http://www.ssdvps.dk/> This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the system manager. This message contains confidential information and is intended only for the individual named. If you are not the named addressee you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notify the sender immediately by e-mail if you have received this e-mail by mistake and delete this e-mail from your system. If you are not the intended recipient you are notified that disclosing, copying, distributing or taking any action in reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited. Fra: Dominik Nowacki [mailto:dominik@clouvider.co.uk] Sendt: 17. februar 2016 17:02 Til: iODC Hostmaster <hostmaster(a)iodc.dk>; Rui Magalhães <rmagalhaes(a)estorilsoldigital.com>; members-discuss-bounces(a)ripe.net Cc: new-lir(a)ripe.net; hostmaster(a)ripe.net; members-discuss(a)ripe.net Emne: RE: [members-discuss] FW: remove from disscusion email list And this concerns other users of this list how ? Contact RIPE via their contact form and complain about the issue instead of making a mess on the mailing list that I guess gets delivered to several thousand people! With Kind Regards, Dominik Nowacki Clouvider Limited is a limited company registered in England and Wales. Registered number: 08750969. Registered office: 88 Wood Street, London, United Kingdom, EC2V 7RS. Please note that Clouvider Limited may monitor email traffic data and also the content of email for the purposes of security and staff training. This message contains confidential information and is intended only for the intended recipient. If you do not believe you are the intended recipient you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notify abuse(a)clouvider.net<mailto:abuse@clouvider.net> of this e-mail immediately by e-mail if you have received this e-mail by mistake and delete this e-mail from your system. E-mail transmission cannot be guaranteed to be secure or error-free as information could be intercepted, corrupted, lost, destroyed, arrive late or incomplete, or contain viruses. Clouvider Limited nor any of its employees therefore does not accept liability for any errors or omissions in the contents of this message, which arise as a result of e-mail transmission. If verification is required please request a hard-copy version. From: iODC Hostmaster [mailto:hostmaster@iodc.dk] Sent: 17 February 2016 15:59 To: Dominik Nowacki <dominik(a)clouvider.co.uk<mailto:dominik@clouvider.co.uk>>; Rui Magalhães <rmagalhaes(a)estorilsoldigital.com<mailto:rmagalhaes@estorilsoldigital.com>>; members-discuss-bounces(a)ripe.net<mailto:members-discuss-bounces@ripe.net> Cc: new-lir(a)ripe.net<mailto:new-lir@ripe.net>; hostmaster(a)ripe.net<mailto:hostmaster@ripe.net>; members-discuss(a)ripe.net<mailto:members-discuss@ripe.net> Subject: SV: [members-discuss] FW: remove from disscusion email list Please understand, that neither works. Unsubscription from LIR portal and by email does not work - we are still receiving. Med venlig hilsen / Best regards NOC [iODC Logo] In & Outbound Datacenter Arnold Nielsens Boulevard 62B, 2650 Hvidovre, Danmark Telefon: 6913 6920, Vagt: 6913 6940 ronnie(a)iodc.dk<mailto:ronnie@iodc.dk> | iodc.dk<http://iodc.dk/> | ssdvps.dk<http://www.ssdvps.dk/> This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the system manager. This message contains confidential information and is intended only for the individual named. If you are not the named addressee you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notify the sender immediately by e-mail if you have received this e-mail by mistake and delete this e-mail from your system. If you are not the intended recipient you are notified that disclosing, copying, distributing or taking any action in reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited. Fra: members-discuss [mailto:members-discuss-bounces@ripe.net] På vegne af Dominik Nowacki Sendt: 17. februar 2016 16:56 Til: Rui Magalhães <rmagalhaes(a)estorilsoldigital.com<mailto:rmagalhaes@estorilsoldigital.com>>; members-discuss-bounces(a)ripe.net<mailto:members-discuss-bounces@ripe.net> Cc: new-lir(a)ripe.net<mailto:new-lir@ripe.net>; hostmaster(a)ripe.net<mailto:hostmaster@ripe.net>; members-discuss(a)ripe.net<mailto:members-discuss@ripe.net> Emne: Re: [members-discuss] FW: remove from disscusion email list You guys are all aware that you can (and have to) unsubscribe yourself the same way you've subscribed ? Let me quote for you: If you don't want to receive emails from the RIPE NCC members-discuss mailing list, please log in to your LIR Portal account and go to the general page: https://lirportal.ripe.net/general/ Click on "Edit my LIR details", under "Subscribed Mailing Lists". From here, you can add or remove addresses. With Kind Regards, Dominik Nowacki Clouvider Limited is a limited company registered in England and Wales. Registered number: 08750969. Registered office: 88 Wood Street, London, United Kingdom, EC2V 7RS. Please note that Clouvider Limited may monitor email traffic data and also the content of email for the purposes of security and staff training. This message contains confidential information and is intended only for the intended recipient. If you do not believe you are the intended recipient you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notify abuse(a)clouvider.net<mailto:abuse@clouvider.net> of this e-mail immediately by e-mail if you have received this e-mail by mistake and delete this e-mail from your system. E-mail transmission cannot be guaranteed to be secure or error-free as information could be intercepted, corrupted, lost, destroyed, arrive late or incomplete, or contain viruses. Clouvider Limited nor any of its employees therefore does not accept liability for any errors or omissions in the contents of this message, which arise as a result of e-mail transmission. If verification is required please request a hard-copy version. From: members-discuss [mailto:members-discuss-bounces@ripe.net] On Behalf Of Rui Magalhães Sent: 17 February 2016 15:47 To: members-discuss-bounces(a)ripe.net<mailto:members-discuss-bounces@ripe.net> Cc: new-lir(a)ripe.net<mailto:new-lir@ripe.net>; members-discuss(a)ripe.net<mailto:members-discuss@ripe.net>; hostmaster(a)ripe.net<mailto:hostmaster@ripe.net> Subject: [members-discuss] FW: remove from disscusion email list Can you kindly remove me from this list and discussion. Thanks you Rui Magalhães Estoril Sol Digital M (ES): +34 619 618 792 M (PT): +351 917 195 135 E-mail: rmagalhaes(a)estorilsoldigital.com<mailto:rmagalhaes@estorilsoldigital.com> Skype: rmmaga http://es.linkedin.com/in/rmmaga/ From: members-discuss <members-discuss-bounces(a)ripe.net<mailto:members-discuss-bounces@ripe.net>> on behalf of Jane Davison <jane.davison(a)foehn.co.uk<mailto:jane.davison@foehn.co.uk>> Date: Wednesday 17 February 2016 at 15:44 To: Omar Dallah <o.dallah(a)dot-jo.com<mailto:o.dallah@dot-jo.com>>, "members-discuss(a)ripe.net<mailto:members-discuss@ripe.net>" <members-discuss(a)ripe.net<mailto:members-discuss@ripe.net>>, 'RIPE NCC Hostmaster' <hostmaster(a)ripe.net<mailto:hostmaster@ripe.net>>, 'RIPE NCC LIR Startup Coordinator' <new-lir(a)ripe.net<mailto:new-lir@ripe.net>> Subject: Re: [members-discuss] remove from disscusion email list Dears, Yes please can you remove me as well for the discussion email list. I have tried to remove and still receiving many emails which is blocking my inbox. Many thanks Jane From: members-discuss [mailto:members-discuss-bounces@ripe.net] On Behalf Of Omar Dallah Sent: 17 February 2016 15:42 To: members-discuss(a)ripe.net<mailto:members-discuss@ripe.net>; 'RIPE NCC Hostmaster'; 'RIPE NCC LIR Startup Coordinator' Subject: [members-discuss] remove from disscusion email list Dears, Please remove my email from the discussion email list. BTW I removed my email by LIR portal but still receiving the discussion emails. Please help. Regards, Omar Dallah From: members-discuss [mailto:members-discuss-bounces@ripe.net] On Behalf Of Matthijs van Seventer Sent: 17 February 2016 16:58 To: BOGDAN Orasanu; 'Markus'; members-discuss(a)ripe.net<mailto:members-discuss@ripe.net>; Claudiu Foleanu Subject: Re: [members-discuss] [comms] [ncc-announce] [news] RIPE NCC Members and Multiple Hello all, LIR's that don't use IPv4 adresses should be able to return them. The only parties that will win otherwise are brokers with ridiculous prices. Matthijs Van: members-discuss [mailto:members-discuss-bounces@ripe.net] Namens BOGDAN Orasanu Verzonden: woensdag 17 februari 2016 15:53 Aan: 'Markus' <universe(a)truemetal.org<mailto:universe@truemetal.org>>; members-discuss(a)ripe.net<mailto:members-discuss@ripe.net>; Claudiu Foleanu <claudiu.foleanu(a)thorpanel.com<mailto:claudiu.foleanu@thorpanel.com>> Onderwerp: Re: [members-discuss] [comms] [ncc-announce] [news] RIPE NCC Members and Multiple Hi there, I administer such a small ISP, that had to return somehow by force half of the allocated IP addreses. This way of doing bussiness should not be encouraged by RIPE, i instead of RIPE will ask a huge LIR that managed milions of IP addresses how come they were able to transfer maybe half of them ? They were only reserved and not used ? Or eliberated of usage thtought some means in order to capitalise ? LIR should be able to manage respurces only toward end user and not among LIRs exept and ISP that want to manage their own address space and not for trade. The resource belongs to public not to lirs. Best regards, Bogdan Orasanu Senior Network Administrator SC Expert Net SRL Sent from my Sony Xperia(tm) smartphone ---- Claudiu Foleanu wrote ---- Hi Markus, The lir send`s a document to the company in wich says "As per end user contract signed you have 3 months to stop using resources" and after this the resources are sold. It happend to a lot (and i do mean a lot) of companies in Romania. I think that Romania is number one in number of resources (ipv4 address space) sold. And as i said in my previous email most of them have been in use. I have a /22 witch is in IRAN now. Sold to an Iranian telecom company by the lir. I have not received any previous notification. Our callcenter just started getting calls about internet not working. We did not imagine that someone will do something like this. We addressed this issue with ripe-ncc at that time and the reply was find a new lir we cannot help in the matter. We should ask a report for tickets created from Romania regarding address space from Romania with the same issue. Best regards, Claudiu Foleanu -----Original Message----- From: members-discuss [mailto:members-discuss-bounces@ripe.net<mailto:members-discuss-bounces@ripe.net>] On Behalf Of Markus Sent: Wednesday, February 17, 2016 4:37 PM To: members-discuss(a)ripe.net<mailto:members-discuss@ripe.net>; Claudiu Foleanu Subject: Re: [members-discuss] [comms] [ncc-announce] [news] RIPE NCC Members and Multiple Hi Claudiu, Am 17.02.2016<tel:17.02.2016> um 15:26 schrieb Claudiu Foleanu: > No it`s not bad to sell ip`s. It`s bad that the people are abusing the > system. It`s bad that small companies that had a /22 a /24 etc.. have > the resources allocated taken away, and sold for profit. [...] can you elaborate on how these small companies have resources taken away from them? I can't imagine how that works. Who forces these companies to give their resources up? I've noticed that a company called "IPv4 Management SRL" (www.ip.ro<http://www.ip.ro>) from your country is selling a lot of smaller IPv4 blocks like all the time. It seems like they are the predominant seller in the RIPE market judging from <https://www.ripe.net/manage-ips-and-asns/resource-transfers-and-mergers/tra nsfers/ipv4/ipv4-transfer-statistics> Do they have something to do with what you described? Cheers Markus ---- If you don't want to receive emails from the RIPE NCC members-discuss mailing list, please log in to your LIR Portal account and go to the general page: https://lirportal.ripe.net/general/ Click on "Edit my LIR details", under "Subscribed Mailing Lists". From here, you can add or remove addresses. ---- If you don't want to receive emails from the RIPE NCC members-discuss mailing list, please log in to your LIR Portal account and go to the general page: https://lirportal.ripe.net/general/ Click on "Edit my LIR details", under "Subscribed Mailing Lists". From here, you can add or remove addresses. ________________________________ This email has been scanned for spam and viruses by Proofpoint Essentials cloud email security - click here<https://eu1.proofpointessentials.com/index01.php?mod_id=11&mod_option=logit…> to report this email as spam.

2 1

Re: [members-discuss] FW: remove from disscusion email list
by Dominik Nowacki 17 Feb '16

17 Feb '16

How ? I'm a member just like you, just slightly not interested in reading about your problems that do not concern the subject of this list at all. You have a problem with RIPE's service? Contact RIPE! https://www.ripe.net/support/contact Not several thousands of other members, who btw can't help you! With Kind Regards, Dominik Nowacki Clouvider Limited is a limited company registered in England and Wales. Registered number: 08750969. Registered office: 88 Wood Street, London, United Kingdom, EC2V 7RS. Please note that Clouvider Limited may monitor email traffic data and also the content of email for the purposes of security and staff training. This message contains confidential information and is intended only for the intended recipient. If you do not believe you are the intended recipient you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notify abuse(a)clouvider.net<mailto:abuse@clouvider.net> of this e-mail immediately by e-mail if you have received this e-mail by mistake and delete this e-mail from your system. E-mail transmission cannot be guaranteed to be secure or error-free as information could be intercepted, corrupted, lost, destroyed, arrive late or incomplete, or contain viruses. Clouvider Limited nor any of its employees therefore does not accept liability for any errors or omissions in the contents of this message, which arise as a result of e-mail transmission. If verification is required please request a hard-copy version. From: MAGNUSSON Sigurdur [mailto:sigurdur.magnusson@swit-ag.ch] Sent: 17 February 2016 16:02 To: Dominik Nowacki <dominik(a)clouvider.co.uk>; Rui Magalhães <rmagalhaes(a)estorilsoldigital.com>; members-discuss-bounces(a)ripe.net Cc: new-lir(a)ripe.net; hostmaster(a)ripe.net; members-discuss(a)ripe.net Subject: AW: [members-discuss] FW: remove from disscusion email list I have tried to remove info(a)swit-ag.ch<mailto:info@swit-ag.ch> using the ticket system and been told this has been removed, but it did not work. So please remove this address. I have already spent quite some time on this. It is wasting time for many people when they receive emails they do not want. Kind regards Siggi Von: members-discuss [mailto:members-discuss-bounces@ripe.net] Im Auftrag von Dominik Nowacki Gesendet: Mittwoch, 17. Februar 2016 16:56 An: Rui Magalhães <rmagalhaes(a)estorilsoldigital.com<mailto:rmagalhaes@estorilsoldigital.com>>; members-discuss-bounces(a)ripe.net<mailto:members-discuss-bounces@ripe.net> Cc: new-lir(a)ripe.net<mailto:new-lir@ripe.net>; hostmaster(a)ripe.net<mailto:hostmaster@ripe.net>; members-discuss(a)ripe.net<mailto:members-discuss@ripe.net> Betreff: Re: [members-discuss] FW: remove from disscusion email list You guys are all aware that you can (and have to) unsubscribe yourself the same way you've subscribed ? Let me quote for you: If you don't want to receive emails from the RIPE NCC members-discuss mailing list, please log in to your LIR Portal account and go to the general page: https://lirportal.ripe.net/general/ Click on "Edit my LIR details", under "Subscribed Mailing Lists". From here, you can add or remove addresses. With Kind Regards, Dominik Nowacki Clouvider Limited is a limited company registered in England and Wales. Registered number: 08750969. Registered office: 88 Wood Street, London, United Kingdom, EC2V 7RS. Please note that Clouvider Limited may monitor email traffic data and also the content of email for the purposes of security and staff training. This message contains confidential information and is intended only for the intended recipient. If you do not believe you are the intended recipient you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notify abuse(a)clouvider.net<mailto:abuse@clouvider.net> of this e-mail immediately by e-mail if you have received this e-mail by mistake and delete this e-mail from your system. E-mail transmission cannot be guaranteed to be secure or error-free as information could be intercepted, corrupted, lost, destroyed, arrive late or incomplete, or contain viruses. Clouvider Limited nor any of its employees therefore does not accept liability for any errors or omissions in the contents of this message, which arise as a result of e-mail transmission. If verification is required please request a hard-copy version. From: members-discuss [mailto:members-discuss-bounces@ripe.net] On Behalf Of Rui Magalhães Sent: 17 February 2016 15:47 To: members-discuss-bounces(a)ripe.net<mailto:members-discuss-bounces@ripe.net> Cc: new-lir(a)ripe.net<mailto:new-lir@ripe.net>; members-discuss(a)ripe.net<mailto:members-discuss@ripe.net>; hostmaster(a)ripe.net<mailto:hostmaster@ripe.net> Subject: [members-discuss] FW: remove from disscusion email list Can you kindly remove me from this list and discussion. Thanks you Rui Magalhães Estoril Sol Digital M (ES): +34 619 618 792 M (PT): +351 917 195 135 E-mail: rmagalhaes(a)estorilsoldigital.com<mailto:rmagalhaes@estorilsoldigital.com> Skype: rmmaga http://es.linkedin.com/in/rmmaga/ From: members-discuss <members-discuss-bounces(a)ripe.net<mailto:members-discuss-bounces@ripe.net>> on behalf of Jane Davison <jane.davison(a)foehn.co.uk<mailto:jane.davison@foehn.co.uk>> Date: Wednesday 17 February 2016 at 15:44 To: Omar Dallah <o.dallah(a)dot-jo.com<mailto:o.dallah@dot-jo.com>>, "members-discuss(a)ripe.net<mailto:members-discuss@ripe.net>" <members-discuss(a)ripe.net<mailto:members-discuss@ripe.net>>, 'RIPE NCC Hostmaster' <hostmaster(a)ripe.net<mailto:hostmaster@ripe.net>>, 'RIPE NCC LIR Startup Coordinator' <new-lir(a)ripe.net<mailto:new-lir@ripe.net>> Subject: Re: [members-discuss] remove from disscusion email list Dears, Yes please can you remove me as well for the discussion email list. I have tried to remove and still receiving many emails which is blocking my inbox. Many thanks Jane From: members-discuss [mailto:members-discuss-bounces@ripe.net] On Behalf Of Omar Dallah Sent: 17 February 2016 15:42 To: members-discuss(a)ripe.net<mailto:members-discuss@ripe.net>; 'RIPE NCC Hostmaster'; 'RIPE NCC LIR Startup Coordinator' Subject: [members-discuss] remove from disscusion email list Dears, Please remove my email from the discussion email list. BTW I removed my email by LIR portal but still receiving the discussion emails. Please help. Regards, Omar Dallah From: members-discuss [mailto:members-discuss-bounces@ripe.net] On Behalf Of Matthijs van Seventer Sent: 17 February 2016 16:58 To: BOGDAN Orasanu; 'Markus'; members-discuss(a)ripe.net<mailto:members-discuss@ripe.net>; Claudiu Foleanu Subject: Re: [members-discuss] [comms] [ncc-announce] [news] RIPE NCC Members and Multiple Hello all, LIR's that don't use IPv4 adresses should be able to return them. The only parties that will win otherwise are brokers with ridiculous prices. Matthijs Van: members-discuss [mailto:members-discuss-bounces@ripe.net] Namens BOGDAN Orasanu Verzonden: woensdag 17 februari 2016 15:53 Aan: 'Markus' <universe(a)truemetal.org<mailto:universe@truemetal.org>>; members-discuss(a)ripe.net<mailto:members-discuss@ripe.net>; Claudiu Foleanu <claudiu.foleanu(a)thorpanel.com<mailto:claudiu.foleanu@thorpanel.com>> Onderwerp: Re: [members-discuss] [comms] [ncc-announce] [news] RIPE NCC Members and Multiple Hi there, I administer such a small ISP, that had to return somehow by force half of the allocated IP addreses. This way of doing bussiness should not be encouraged by RIPE, i instead of RIPE will ask a huge LIR that managed milions of IP addresses how come they were able to transfer maybe half of them ? They were only reserved and not used ? Or eliberated of usage thtought some means in order to capitalise ? LIR should be able to manage respurces only toward end user and not among LIRs exept and ISP that want to manage their own address space and not for trade. The resource belongs to public not to lirs. Best regards, Bogdan Orasanu Senior Network Administrator SC Expert Net SRL Sent from my Sony Xperia(tm) smartphone ---- Claudiu Foleanu wrote ---- Hi Markus, The lir send`s a document to the company in wich says "As per end user contract signed you have 3 months to stop using resources" and after this the resources are sold. It happend to a lot (and i do mean a lot) of companies in Romania. I think that Romania is number one in number of resources (ipv4 address space) sold. And as i said in my previous email most of them have been in use. I have a /22 witch is in IRAN now. Sold to an Iranian telecom company by the lir. I have not received any previous notification. Our callcenter just started getting calls about internet not working. We did not imagine that someone will do something like this. We addressed this issue with ripe-ncc at that time and the reply was find a new lir we cannot help in the matter. We should ask a report for tickets created from Romania regarding address space from Romania with the same issue. Best regards, Claudiu Foleanu -----Original Message----- From: members-discuss [mailto:members-discuss-bounces@ripe.net<mailto:members-discuss-bounces@ripe.net>] On Behalf Of Markus Sent: Wednesday, February 17, 2016 4:37 PM To: members-discuss(a)ripe.net<mailto:members-discuss@ripe.net>; Claudiu Foleanu Subject: Re: [members-discuss] [comms] [ncc-announce] [news] RIPE NCC Members and Multiple Hi Claudiu, Am 17.02.2016<tel:17.02.2016> um 15:26 schrieb Claudiu Foleanu: > No it`s not bad to sell ip`s. It`s bad that the people are abusing the > system. It`s bad that small companies that had a /22 a /24 etc.. have > the resources allocated taken away, and sold for profit. [...] can you elaborate on how these small companies have resources taken away from them? I can't imagine how that works. Who forces these companies to give their resources up? I've noticed that a company called "IPv4 Management SRL" (www.ip.ro<http://www.ip.ro>) from your country is selling a lot of smaller IPv4 blocks like all the time. It seems like they are the predominant seller in the RIPE market judging from <https://www.ripe.net/manage-ips-and-asns/resource-transfers-and-mergers/tra nsfers/ipv4/ipv4-transfer-statistics> Do they have something to do with what you described? Cheers Markus ---- If you don't want to receive emails from the RIPE NCC members-discuss mailing list, please log in to your LIR Portal account and go to the general page: https://lirportal.ripe.net/general/ Click on "Edit my LIR details", under "Subscribed Mailing Lists". From here, you can add or remove addresses. ---- If you don't want to receive emails from the RIPE NCC members-discuss mailing list, please log in to your LIR Portal account and go to the general page: https://lirportal.ripe.net/general/ Click on "Edit my LIR details", under "Subscribed Mailing Lists". From here, you can add or remove addresses. ________________________________ This email has been scanned for spam and viruses by Proofpoint Essentials cloud email security - click here<https://eu1.proofpointessentials.com/index01.php?mod_id=11&mod_option=logit…> to report this email as spam.

1 0

Re: [members-discuss] remove from disscusion email list
by LARDERET Xavier 17 Feb '16

17 Feb '16

Dears, Can you also remove my email from the list Thanks Xavier Le 17 févr. 2016 16:45, Jane Davison <jane.davison(a)foehn.co.uk> a écrit : Dears, Yes please can you remove me as well for the discussion email list. I have tried to remove and still receiving many emails which is blocking my inbox. Many thanks Jane From: members-discuss [mailto:members-discuss-bounces@ripe.net] On Behalf Of Omar Dallah Sent: 17 February 2016 15:42 To: members-discuss(a)ripe.net; 'RIPE NCC Hostmaster'; 'RIPE NCC LIR Startup Coordinator' Subject: [members-discuss] remove from disscusion email list Dears, Please remove my email from the discussion email list. BTW I removed my email by LIR portal but still receiving the discussion emails. Please help. Regards, Omar Dallah From: members-discuss [mailto:members-discuss-bounces@ripe.net] On Behalf Of Matthijs van Seventer Sent: 17 February 2016 16:58 To: BOGDAN Orasanu; 'Markus'; members-discuss(a)ripe.net<mailto:members-discuss@ripe.net>; Claudiu Foleanu Subject: Re: [members-discuss] [comms] [ncc-announce] [news] RIPE NCC Members and Multiple Hello all, LIR’s that don’t use IPv4 adresses should be able to return them. The only parties that will win otherwise are brokers with ridiculous prices. Matthijs Van: members-discuss [mailto:members-discuss-bounces@ripe.net] Namens BOGDAN Orasanu Verzonden: woensdag 17 februari 2016 15:53 Aan: 'Markus' <universe(a)truemetal.org<mailto:universe@truemetal.org>>; members-discuss(a)ripe.net<mailto:members-discuss@ripe.net>; Claudiu Foleanu <claudiu.foleanu(a)thorpanel.com<mailto:claudiu.foleanu@thorpanel.com>> Onderwerp: Re: [members-discuss] [comms] [ncc-announce] [news] RIPE NCC Members and Multiple Hi there, I administer such a small ISP, that had to return somehow by force half of the allocated IP addreses. This way of doing bussiness should not be encouraged by RIPE, i instead of RIPE will ask a huge LIR that managed milions of IP addresses how come they were able to transfer maybe half of them ? They were only reserved and not used ? Or eliberated of usage thtought some means in order to capitalise ? LIR should be able to manage respurces only toward end user and not among LIRs exept and ISP that want to manage their own address space and not for trade. The resource belongs to public not to lirs. Best regards, Bogdan Orasanu Senior Network Administrator SC Expert Net SRL Sent from my Sony Xperia™ smartphone ---- Claudiu Foleanu wrote ---- Hi Markus, The lir send`s a document to the company in wich says "As per end user contract signed you have 3 months to stop using resources" and after this the resources are sold. It happend to a lot (and i do mean a lot) of companies in Romania. I think that Romania is number one in number of resources (ipv4 address space) sold. And as i said in my previous email most of them have been in use. I have a /22 witch is in IRAN now. Sold to an Iranian telecom company by the lir. I have not received any previous notification. Our callcenter just started getting calls about internet not working. We did not imagine that someone will do something like this. We addressed this issue with ripe-ncc at that time and the reply was find a new lir we cannot help in the matter. We should ask a report for tickets created from Romania regarding address space from Romania with the same issue. Best regards, Claudiu Foleanu -----Original Message----- From: members-discuss [mailto:members-discuss-bounces@ripe.net<mailto:members-discuss-bounces@ripe.net>] On Behalf Of Markus Sent: Wednesday, February 17, 2016 4:37 PM To: members-discuss(a)ripe.net<mailto:members-discuss@ripe.net>; Claudiu Foleanu Subject: Re: [members-discuss] [comms] [ncc-announce] [news] RIPE NCC Members and Multiple Hi Claudiu, Am 17.02.2016<tel:17.02.2016> um 15:26 schrieb Claudiu Foleanu: > No it`s not bad to sell ip`s. It`s bad that the people are abusing the > system. It`s bad that small companies that had a /22 a /24 etc.. have > the resources allocated taken away, and sold for profit. [...] can you elaborate on how these small companies have resources taken away from them? I can't imagine how that works. Who forces these companies to give their resources up? I've noticed that a company called "IPv4 Management SRL" (www.ip.ro<http://www.ip.ro>) from your country is selling a lot of smaller IPv4 blocks like all the time. It seems like they are the predominant seller in the RIPE market judging from <https://www.ripe.net/manage-ips-and-asns/resource-transfers-and-mergers/tra nsfers/ipv4/ipv4-transfer-statistics> Do they have something to do with what you described? Cheers Markus ---- If you don't want to receive emails from the RIPE NCC members-discuss mailing list, please log in to your LIR Portal account and go to the general page: https://lirportal.ripe.net/general/ Click on "Edit my LIR details", under "Subscribed Mailing Lists". From here, you can add or remove addresses. ---- If you don't want to receive emails from the RIPE NCC members-discuss mailing list, please log in to your LIR Portal account and go to the general page: https://lirportal.ripe.net/general/ Click on "Edit my LIR details", under "Subscribed Mailing Lists". From here, you can add or remove addresses. ________________________________ This email has been scanned for spam and viruses by Proofpoint Essentials cloud email security - click here<https://eu1.proofpointessentials.com/index01.php?mod_id=11&mod_option=logit…> to report this email as spam.

3 2

unsubscribe
by jeroen van Veen 17 Feb '16

17 Feb '16

From: members-discuss [mailto:members-discuss-bounces@ripe.net] On Behalf Of Maarten Dammers Sent: woensdag 17 februari 2016 16:54 To: members-discuss(a)ripe.net Subject: [members-discuss] How to unsubscribe To unsubscribe: mailto:members-discuss-request@ripe.net?subject=unsubscribe (unless RIPE hacked mailman) Met vriendelijke groet / With kind regards, Maarten Dammers Netwerk Expert From: members-discuss [mailto:members-discuss-bounces@ripe.net] On Behalf Of techno zone Sent: woensdag 17 februari 2016 16:48 To: Twana Othman Cc: RIPE NCC LIR Startup Coordinator; RIPE NCC Hostmaster; members-discuss(a)ripe.net Subject: Re: [members-discuss] remove from disscusion email list Please remove my email from the discussion email list On Wed, Feb 17, 2016 at 7:45 AM, Twana Othman <twana.othman(a)tishknet.com> wrote: Dears, Please my email as well. From: members-discuss [mailto:members-discuss-bounces@ripe.net] On Behalf Of Omar Dallah Sent: Wednesday, February 17, 2016 6:42 PM To: members-discuss(a)ripe.net; 'RIPE NCC Hostmaster'; 'RIPE NCC LIR Startup Coordinator' Subject: [members-discuss] remove from disscusion email list Dears, Please remove my email from the discussion email list. BTW I removed my email by LIR portal but still receiving the discussion emails. Please help. Regards, Omar Dallah

1 0

How to unsubscribe
by Maarten Dammers 17 Feb '16

17 Feb '16

To unsubscribe: mailto:members-discuss-request@ripe.net?subject=unsubscribe (unless RIPE hacked mailman) Met vriendelijke groet / With kind regards, Maarten Dammers Netwerk Expert From: members-discuss [mailto:members-discuss-bounces@ripe.net] On Behalf Of techno zone Sent: woensdag 17 februari 2016 16:48 To: Twana Othman Cc: RIPE NCC LIR Startup Coordinator; RIPE NCC Hostmaster; members-discuss(a)ripe.net Subject: Re: [members-discuss] remove from disscusion email list Please remove my email from the discussion email list On Wed, Feb 17, 2016 at 7:45 AM, Twana Othman <twana.othman(a)tishknet.com<mailto:twana.othman@tishknet.com>> wrote: Dears, Please my email as well. From: members-discuss [mailto:members-discuss-bounces@ripe.net<mailto:members-discuss-bounces@ripe.net>] On Behalf Of Omar Dallah Sent: Wednesday, February 17, 2016 6:42 PM To: members-discuss(a)ripe.net<mailto:members-discuss@ripe.net>; 'RIPE NCC Hostmaster'; 'RIPE NCC LIR Startup Coordinator' Subject: [members-discuss] remove from disscusion email list Dears, Please remove my email from the discussion email list. BTW I removed my email by LIR portal but still receiving the discussion emails. Please help. Regards, Omar Dallah

2 1

Re: [members-discuss] [comms] [ncc-announce] [news] RIPE NCC Members and Multiple
by Markus 17 Feb '16

17 Feb '16

Am 17.02.2016 um 16:15 schrieb Claudiu Foleanu: > Hi Markus, > > Yes you are correct. > Space allocated to us by other LIR`s. > Like already said we reported this to the ripe consultant who came to > Bucharest. > I explained for over 2 hour this issue to him. > The report is here : > https://www.ripe.net/participate/member-support/surveys/ripe-ncc-consultatio > ns-report-2015 > But it does not convey the gravity of the situation. > Like i said to the consultant, ripe ncc never notified an end user and told > him that the lir can take the allocated space back. Thanks for explaining.

1 0

Re: [members-discuss] [comms] [ncc-announce] [news] RIPE NCC Members and Multiple
by Silviu Vladuti 17 Feb '16

17 Feb '16

Hello I have the same problem! In Romania are 2 companies S.C. GVM SISTEM 2003 S.R.L. IPv4 Management SRL -----Original Message----- From: members-discuss [mailto:members-discuss-bounces@ripe.net] On Behalf Of Claudiu Foleanu Sent: Wednesday, February 17, 2016 4:45 PM To: 'Markus' <universe(a)truemetal.org>; members-discuss(a)ripe.net Subject: Re: [members-discuss] [comms] [ncc-announce] [news] RIPE NCC Members and Multiple Hi Markus, The lir send`s a document to the company in wich says "As per end user contract signed you have 3 months to stop using resources" and after this the resources are sold. It happend to a lot (and i do mean a lot) of companies in Romania. I think that Romania is number one in number of resources (ipv4 address space) sold. And as i said in my previous email most of them have been in use. I have a /22 witch is in IRAN now. Sold to an Iranian telecom company by the lir. I have not received any previous notification. Our callcenter just started getting calls about internet not working. We did not imagine that someone will do something like this. We addressed this issue with ripe-ncc at that time and the reply was find a new lir we cannot help in the matter. We should ask a report for tickets created from Romania regarding address space from Romania with the same issue. Best regards, Claudiu Foleanu -----Original Message----- From: members-discuss [mailto:members-discuss-bounces@ripe.net] On Behalf Of Markus Sent: Wednesday, February 17, 2016 4:37 PM To: members-discuss(a)ripe.net; Claudiu Foleanu Subject: Re: [members-discuss] [comms] [ncc-announce] [news] RIPE NCC Members and Multiple Hi Claudiu, Am 17.02.2016 um 15:26 schrieb Claudiu Foleanu: > No it`s not bad to sell ip`s. It`s bad that the people are abusing the > system. It`s bad that small companies that had a /22 a /24 etc.. have > the resources allocated taken away, and sold for profit. [...] can you elaborate on how these small companies have resources taken away from them? I can't imagine how that works. Who forces these companies to give their resources up? I've noticed that a company called "IPv4 Management SRL" (www.ip.ro) from your country is selling a lot of smaller IPv4 blocks like all the time. It seems like they are the predominant seller in the RIPE market judging from <https://www.ripe.net/manage-ips-and-asns/resource-transfers-and-mergers/tra nsfers/ipv4/ipv4-transfer-statistics> Do they have something to do with what you described? Cheers Markus ---- If you don't want to receive emails from the RIPE NCC members-discuss mailing list, please log in to your LIR Portal account and go to the general page: https://lirportal.ripe.net/general/ Click on "Edit my LIR details", under "Subscribed Mailing Lists". From here, you can add or remove addresses. ---- If you don't want to receive emails from the RIPE NCC members-discuss mailing list, please log in to your LIR Portal account and go to the general page: https://lirportal.ripe.net/general/ Click on "Edit my LIR details", under "Subscribed Mailing Lists". From here, you can add or remove addresses.

1 0

Re: [members-discuss] [comms] [ncc-announce] [news] RIPE NCC Members and Multiple
by Markus 17 Feb '16

17 Feb '16

Am 17.02.2016 um 15:45 schrieb Claudiu Foleanu: > The lir send`s a document to the company in wich says "As per end user > contract signed you have 3 months to stop using resources" and after this > the resources are sold. [...] So for some Romanian LIRs it is more profitable to sell the space an end customer has than to keep the customer? About the /22: You are a LIR yourself, does that mean you are talking about address space that was assigned to you from another LIR respectively from a time long ago when you yet weren't a LIR? Just trying to understand the issue. Thank you, Markus

2 1

Re: [members-discuss] [comms] [ncc-announce] [news] RIPE NCC Members and Multiple
by Anthony Somerset 17 Feb '16

17 Feb '16

surely your solution would be to get your own LIR rather than “rent” from another if you need that much space? Anthony Somerset, Technical Director, w: cloudunboxed.net <http://www.cloudunboxed.net/> | e: anthony.somerset(a)cloudunboxed.net <mailto:anthony.somerset@cloudunboxed.net> | t: +44 (0)33 0088 2444 Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail. This e-mail and any attachments are confidential and intended for the addressed individual or entity only. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately and then discard this e-mail. Unauthorized copying, sharing and distributing of this e-mail is prohibited. The content in this e-mail does not necessarily represent the views of the company. The addressee should check all attachments for malware; the company makes no representation as regards the absence of malware in attachments to this e-mail. > On 17 Feb,2016, at 16:45, Claudiu Foleanu <claudiu.foleanu(a)thorpanel.com> wrote: > > Hi Markus, > > The lir send`s a document to the company in wich says "As per end user > contract signed you have 3 months to stop using resources" and after this > the resources are sold. > It happend to a lot (and i do mean a lot) of companies in Romania. I think > that Romania is number one in number of resources (ipv4 address space) sold. > And as i said in my previous email most of them have been in use. I have a > /22 witch is in IRAN now. Sold to an Iranian telecom company by the lir. I > have not received any previous notification. Our callcenter just started > getting calls about internet not working. We did not imagine that someone > will do something like this. > We addressed this issue with ripe-ncc at that time and the reply was find a > new lir we cannot help in the matter. > We should ask a report for tickets created from Romania regarding address > space from Romania with the same issue. > > Best regards, > Claudiu Foleanu > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: members-discuss [mailto:members-discuss-bounces@ripe.net] On Behalf Of > Markus > Sent: Wednesday, February 17, 2016 4:37 PM > To: members-discuss(a)ripe.net; Claudiu Foleanu > Subject: Re: [members-discuss] [comms] [ncc-announce] [news] RIPE NCC > Members and Multiple > > Hi Claudiu, > > Am 17.02.2016 um 15:26 schrieb Claudiu Foleanu: >> No it`s not bad to sell ip`s. It`s bad that the people are abusing the >> system. It`s bad that small companies that had a /22 a /24 etc.. have >> the resources allocated taken away, and sold for profit. > [...] > > can you elaborate on how these small companies have resources taken away > from them? I can't imagine how that works. Who forces these companies to > give their resources up? > > I've noticed that a company called "IPv4 Management SRL" (www.ip.ro) from > your country is selling a lot of smaller IPv4 blocks like all the time. It > seems like they are the predominant seller in the RIPE market judging from > <https://www.ripe.net/manage-ips-and-asns/resource-transfers-and-mergers/tra > nsfers/ipv4/ipv4-transfer-statistics> > > Do they have something to do with what you described? > > Cheers > Markus > > > > > > > > > > ---- > If you don't want to receive emails from the RIPE NCC members-discuss > mailing list, please log in to your LIR Portal account and go to the general > page: > https://lirportal.ripe.net/general/ > > Click on "Edit my LIR details", under "Subscribed Mailing Lists". From here, > you can add or remove addresses. > > > ---- > If you don't want to receive emails from the RIPE NCC members-discuss > mailing list, please log in to your LIR Portal account and go to the general page: > https://lirportal.ripe.net/general/ > > Click on "Edit my LIR details", under "Subscribed Mailing Lists". From here, you can add or remove addresses.

1 0

Re: [members-discuss] [comms] [ncc-announce] [news] RIPE NCC Members and Multiple
by Markus 17 Feb '16

17 Feb '16

Hi Claudiu, Am 17.02.2016 um 15:26 schrieb Claudiu Foleanu: > No it`s not bad to sell ip`s. It`s bad that the people are abusing the > system. It`s bad that small companies that had a /22 a /24 etc.. have the > resources allocated taken away, and sold for profit. [...] can you elaborate on how these small companies have resources taken away from them? I can't imagine how that works. Who forces these companies to give their resources up? I've noticed that a company called "IPv4 Management SRL" (www.ip.ro) from your country is selling a lot of smaller IPv4 blocks like all the time. It seems like they are the predominant seller in the RIPE market judging from <https://www.ripe.net/manage-ips-and-asns/resource-transfers-and-mergers/tra…> Do they have something to do with what you described? Cheers Markus

2 1

[ncc-announce] [news] RIPE NCC Members and Multiple LIR Accounts - Please Discuss
by David Treanor 17 Feb '16

17 Feb '16

> 1. Is the activity of members opening additional LIR accounts a > problem > that must be prevented? The rapid increase in new account creation seems to indicate that this is being used to abuse the rules. Yes it must be prevented. > 2. If this activity is a problem that must be prevented, what action > should the RIPE NCC take to attempt its prevention? Limit (or even stop) the creation of additional accounts (per member) and put checks in place that the IP addresses are being used according to guidelines. Adding additional costs could be a deterrent but since this is not an economical issue, I don't think this is the route to go. Requesting v4 addresses be returned is a temporary fix only - we should be encouraging and promoting v6 so that this becomes is a non-issue asap. Regards, Dave ________________________________ Von: Nigel Titley<mailto:exec-board@ripe.net> Gesendet: ‎11.‎02.‎2016 18:02 An: ncc-announce(a)ripe.net<mailto:ncc-announce@ripe.net> Betreff: [ncc-announce] [news] RIPE NCC Members and Multiple LIR Accounts - Please Discuss Dear colleagues, The RIPE NCC Executive Board would like to ask the membership to discuss the issue of RIPE NCC members opening additional LIR accounts. There were comments at the RIPE NCC General Meeting (GM) in November 2015 that members having the ability to open additional LIR accounts, each of which can request a /22 of IPv4 address space, may run against the spirit of the last /8 policy. In light of this, the Board decided to temporarily suspend the ability of RIPE NCC members to open additional LIR accounts. The RIPE NCC began to allocate IPv4 address space from the last /8 policy on 14 September 2012. Since that time the RIPE NCC has allocated more than 8,600 /22s, yet there remains 0.94 of a /8 still in the pool. ACTION REQUIRED: The Board asks the membership to provide their opinion on and discuss the following points: 1. Is the activity of members opening additional LIR accounts a problem that must be prevented? 2. If this activity is a problem that must be prevented, what action should the RIPE NCC take to attempt its prevention? Statistics pertinent to this discussion are available in this article on RIPE Labs: https://labs.ripe.net/Members/laura_cobley/ripe-ncc-members-and-multiple-li… The Board asks that members discuss this issue on the Members Discuss mailing list <members-discuss(a)ripe.net<mailto:members-discuss@ripe.net>>. The Board will monitor the discussion and will review it at the next Executive Board Meeting on 31 March 2016. Depending on the outcome of that meeting, the Board may propose a resolution for members to vote on at the RIPE NCC General Meeting in May 2016. Best regards, Nigel Titley RIPE NCC Executive Board ________________________________ Diese E-Mail enth?lt vertrauliche und/oder rechtlich gesch?tzte Informationen. Wenn Sie nicht der richtige Adressat sind oder diese E-Mail irrt?mlich erhalten haben, informieren Sie bitte sofort den Absender und vernichten Sie diese E-Mail. Das unerlaubte Kopieren sowie die unbefugte Weitergabe dieser E-Mail ist nicht gestattet. This e-mail contains confidential and/or privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient (or have received this e-mail in error) please notify the sender immediately and destroy this e-mail. Any unauthorized copying, disclosure or distribution of the material in this e-mail is strictly forbidden. ITVT GmbH Handelsregister: Amtsgericht Stuttgart, HRB21862 Gesch?ftsf?hrer: Jochen Klipfel, Patrick Kreuzer, J?rgen Lorenz

8 10

Increase amount of bots in the mailling list
by Lu Heng 17 Feb '16

17 Feb '16

Hi Guys: Seriously, it is not first time people complaint about it,please, unsubscribe your ticket system from the mailing list, it is really annoying every time I sent out a reply I get 10 auto responds. Should we ask RIPE NCC add field in the new member application form says "members discussion mailing list Email: ", in which specially quote "no auto responds allowed in the list". Since the increasing amount of members are coming. -- -- Kind regards. Lu

4 3

Re: [members-discuss] [ncc-announce] [news] RIPE NCC Members and Multiple LIR Accounts - Please Discuss
by Arash Naderpour 17 Feb '16

17 Feb '16

Hi, After checking the provided statistics and current IPv4 available pool, I'm interested to know that base on the last 12 month net allocation rate when would be the full depletion of RIPE NCC's IPv4 pool. At the moment it seems that opening additional LIR accounts by a member is not a problem (to me), and there are some benefits for current members, too. Regards, Arash Naderpour -----Original Message----- From: ncc-announce [mailto:ncc-announce-bounces@ripe.net] On Behalf Of Nigel Titley Sent: Thursday, February 11, 2016 9:56 PM To: ncc-announce(a)ripe.net Subject: [ncc-announce] [news] RIPE NCC Members and Multiple LIR Accounts - Please Discuss Dear colleagues, The RIPE NCC Executive Board would like to ask the membership to discuss the issue of RIPE NCC members opening additional LIR accounts. There were comments at the RIPE NCC General Meeting (GM) in November 2015 that members having the ability to open additional LIR accounts, each of which can request a /22 of IPv4 address space, may run against the spirit of the last /8 policy. In light of this, the Board decided to temporarily suspend the ability of RIPE NCC members to open additional LIR accounts. The RIPE NCC began to allocate IPv4 address space from the last /8 policy on 14 September 2012. Since that time the RIPE NCC has allocated more than 8,600 /22s, yet there remains 0.94 of a /8 still in the pool. ACTION REQUIRED: The Board asks the membership to provide their opinion on and discuss the following points: 1. Is the activity of members opening additional LIR accounts a problem that must be prevented? 2. If this activity is a problem that must be prevented, what action should the RIPE NCC take to attempt its prevention? Statistics pertinent to this discussion are available in this article on RIPE Labs: https://labs.ripe.net/Members/laura_cobley/ripe-ncc-members-and-multiple-li… The Board asks that members discuss this issue on the Members Discuss mailing list <members-discuss(a)ripe.net>. The Board will monitor the discussion and will review it at the next Executive Board Meeting on 31 March 2016. Depending on the outcome of that meeting, the Board may propose a resolution for members to vote on at the RIPE NCC General Meeting in May 2016. Best regards, Nigel Titley RIPE NCC Executive Board

3 2

Mailing List Technical Issues
by Serge Radovcic 17 Feb '16

17 Feb '16

Dear colleagues, We recently discovered an issue affecting subscriptions to the <ncc-announce(a)ripe.net> and <members-discuss(a)ripe.net> mailing lists. An error introduced into our automated processes was preventing subscription changes made via the LIR Portal from being reflected on these mailing lists. No other mailing lists were affected. This issue was in effect from 1 September 2015 and has now been resolved. The majority of you will not have been affected by this issue, and any changes you may have made to your subscriptions to the <ncc-announce(a)ripe.net> and <members-discuss(a)ripe.net> mailing lists during this time (including subscribing, unsubscribing or changing your contact email address) have now been processed. No further action is required on your part. A record of all emails sent to these lists is available in the archives. <ncc-announce(a)ripe.net> archives are available at: https://www.ripe.net/ripe/mail/archives/ncc-announce/ <members-discuss(a)ripe.net> archives are available at: https://www.ripe.net/ripe/mail/archives/members-discuss/ Timely communications with our members is very important to us, and we sincerely regret this error. We have introduced measures to ensure this doesn’t happen again, and we apologise for any inconvenience this may have caused. Kind regards, Serge Radovcic Chief Communications Officer RIPE NCC

1 0

Re: [members-discuss] [comms] [ncc-announce] [news] RIPE NCC Members and Multiple
by Thomas Mangin 17 Feb '16

17 Feb '16

Dear RIPE NCC Board, Thank you for opening this discussion/consultation. > 1. Is the activity of members opening additional LIR accounts a > problem that must be prevented? It is. The RIPE NCC policies should be written in a way which is beneficial to its community. Having a number of organisations using them to profit (financially or by gaining more IP addresses) is not in our community’s interest. However, any response to a problem should be proportional to the issue and therefore the RIPE NCC’s answer to this problem should take in consideration the number of member abusing the system and the harm being done to the community. The last /8 policy was mostly written to make sure new entrants are not priced out of market and from the data there is no evidence this is yet the case. Therefore any solution should be careful to keep this goal. 2. If this activity is a problem that must be prevented, what action should the RIPE NCC take to attempt its prevention? This is a very broad topic, and a decision by consensus without some more research and a/some paper(s) to guide the discussion seems unwise here. That said … Like others, I can see two scenarios why an organisation may register several LIR: (0) it is practical for their organisation - nothing to see (1) to secure for itself several /22 when the last /8 policy comes in play (2) to secure a number of /22 to resell … If the board is aware of other case, I would welcome some enlightemement For case (1) The RIPE NCC could restrict the number of LIR an organisation wish to have (to a suitable low but practical number) as long as this does not impact genuine use of the RIPE NCC. For case (2), The most likely impact of forbidding this practice may be to increase the price of IPv4 at sales (passing on the cost of the business creation), which would affect people needing IP space - and required to purchase some - more than the people selling it and making the profit. Price changes should only be brought forward if the RIPE NCC is sure it can price ‘bad’ business models out. As this is something we have no data to make our mind on and and which may also have other side effects - I am unsure it would be wise. Also the membership should keep in mind that any new ‘policy’ will be immediately ‘played’ by people actively trying to game the system. Therefore careful thoughts should be placed on any new rule placed which will therefore inevitably have unintended consequences. Regarding enforcing some rules for the transfer of resources, I am concerned it could place the organisation in a position where it could be on the receiving hand of legal challenges. Therefore I would favour any solution which would not require any ‘human judgement’ by the RIPE NCC at transfer time. > The Board will monitor the discussion and will review it at the next > Executive Board Meeting on 31 March 2016. Depending on the outcome of > that meeting, the Board may propose a resolution for members to vote > on at the RIPE NCC General Meeting in May 2016. I would hope the RIPE NCC does put forwad some proposals for vote. As the board may not be in a position to ‘guess’ the option(s) most likely to gain consensus, a number of proposals could be presented to the membership so should a proposal succeed (or fail) others can be presented to complete / replace it. (This assumes the extra new LIRs are not already in a veto position with our usual voting engagement) Also the RIPE NCC may consider to add this information to the list of RIPE NCC’s LIR as: - it would allow to spot who may oppose changes to the RIPE NCC policies due to personal gain - it would the community to use other form of self-regulation to act on this matter should the RIPE NCC fail to reach consensus. Some of the options to remove the benefit of registering several LIR are (more than one could be considered for a solution): - creating some more aggresive rules regarding the transfer of resources - not allowing resources transfer for ‘young’ LIR - changing the rules for the last /8 * having a concept of related LIR * providing some space in relation to the existing allocation (at the cost of increasing the fragmentation of the /8). - revoking the last /8 policy - treating it as normal - revoking the last /8 policy - keeping the space until more visibility on how best use it can be gathered. - .. surely some more .. Sincerely, Thomas Mangin Exa Networks Limited

10 13

Re: [members-discuss] [comms] [ncc-announce] [news] RIPE NCC Members and Multiple
by Aleksey Bulgakov 16 Feb '16

16 Feb '16

2 1

Multiple LIR discussion and courteous behaviour
by Nigel Titley 16 Feb '16

16 Feb '16

Dear all, It has been brought to our attention that some contributors to this discussion have received abusive personal emails off the list from other RIPE NCC members. We ask that members refrain from such activity and continue the discussion on the list in a respectful manner. Best regards, Nigel Titley RIPE NCC Executive Board Chairman

1 0