May 2016 - members-discuss - mailman.ripe.net

Re: [members-discuss] Bots subscribed to the list
by Brandon Butterworth 30 May '16

30 May '16

On Sun May 29, 2016 at 08:34:04AM +0300, Sergiu IANCIUC wrote: > hi, > > let's imagine that each member will answer - i agree...  > > I also propose to unsubscribe guys that with answer as "yes, I agree" > or "Agree fully" or something like this. ;) > and those sending html only email brandon

1 0

Bots subscribed to the list
by Dominik Nowacki 29 May '16

29 May '16

Hi, Can I please ask RIPE staff to look at the list again and get all the bots to be unsubscribed ? It's very disruptive to get a significant number of ticket desks, autoresponders, or mailer daemon emails every time you send anything to the discussion list... Kind Regards, Dom uk.clouvider

22 29

IETF funding
by Sander Steffann 28 May '16

28 May '16

Hi, As requested by Nigel Titley at the NCC Services working group session, I would like to express my support for the RIPE NCC to participate in the long-term funding to the IETF. For those who didn't attend the session, here are the slides: https://ripe72.ripe.net/presentations/107-RIPE-Presentation-Deck-for-Svcs-W… And the video recording: https://ripe72.ripe.net/archives/video/179 Cheers, Sander

16 19

IPV4 Addresses
by David Benwell 27 May '16

27 May '16

Hi, With IPv4 running out and LIRs only being allowed final /22 in my view makes it unfair to new members who may need additional addresses. With some of the other LIRs having for example /19 unused makes it unfair for them to advertise their unused address space on the transfer service and want to charge up words of £8 per IP Address. Given the fact the IP Addresses is a public resource, I fail to see how it should be allowed for LIRs to make a profit out of unused space. There should be a policy and if the address space is not used / required, it must be handed back to the public pool of resources so can then be allocated to other LIRS as part of their annual membership. I even recall the Government sitting on "I believe" a /8 and then tried to sell this off to raise money. Again this should not be allowed. LIRS should NOT be able to make profit for selling a public resource. Regards Dave [http://www.3cxacademy.com/mod/certificate/pix/seals/3CX-Certified-Engineer.…] Dave Benwell - 3CX Certified Professional [http://www.3cx-phone-system.co.uk/email-sig/Signature.png] [http://www.3cx-phone-system.co.uk/email-sig/image001.png] support(a)it-communicationsltd.co.uk<mailto:support@it-communicationsltd.co.uk> [http://www.3cx-phone-system.co.uk/email-sig/image003.png] www.it-communicationsltd.co.uk<http://www.it-communicationsltd.co.uk> [http://www.3cx-phone-system.co.uk/email-sig/image005.png] @IT Communications<https://twitter.com/ITCommsltd> [http://www.3cx-phone-system.co.uk/email-sig/image007.png] Facebook<http://www.facebook.com/pages/IT-Communications-LTD-3cx-support/17304530937…> Telephone: 01702 66 88 36 | Fax: 01702 66 88 37 Office: I.T Communications Limited, 20-24 High Street, Rayleigh, Essex, SS6 7EF [cid:image006.gif@01CE1059.1B386EA0] This email, including any attachment, is private and confidential. It should not be read, copied, disclosed or otherwise used by any person other than the intended recipient(s). If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender immediately. I.T Communications Limited is a company registered in England, registered number 7418692. Registered office: I.T Communications Limited, Seedbed Business Centre, Vanguard Way, Shoeburyness, Essex, SS3 9QY

9 8

Re: [members-discuss] IETF funding
by Lutz Donnerhacke 26 May '16

26 May '16

> To be clear, Nigel asked for the members to speak up to give the board > guidance on this subject, he wasn't the one asking for the funding :) Considering Peter Koch remarks on this topic, I must admit, that the proposed procedure seems not well founded. It has major drawbacks for the RIPE community itself (tax issues, losing project money), and it does not provide the proposed long-term solution. ITEF can't count on such payments over a longer period of time. Therefore an increased financial grant of the RIPE community through the ISOC channel seems much more appropriate. If there is an extended influence, I'd count that as a plus. We are currently experiencing the situation, that egoistic players become LIRs solely for getting access to limited resources (aka make money fast) and they do understand that this "LIR-cheating" offer them increased voting rights ... So an integrated support of the IETF looks much more promising to me.

1 0

New request created with ID: ##7888## from Peter Koch
by Service desk 26 May '16

26 May '16

1 0

New request created with ID: ##7886## from Leopoldo Maestro - Soltia Consulting SL
by Service desk 26 May '16

26 May '16

1 0

New request created with ID: ##7885## from Daniel Suchy
by Service desk 26 May '16

26 May '16

1 0

New request created with ID: ##7884## from Dominik Nowacki
by Service desk 26 May '16

26 May '16

1 0

New request created with ID: ##7883## from Nick Hilliard
by Service desk 26 May '16

26 May '16

1 0