My opinion remains the same! The main task of RIPE NCC is to manage the IP address space. And unfortunately we are not doing well with this.
Yes and No... The main tasks of RIPE is to manage the IR (Internet Resourses) and not only IPV4/IPV6 address spaces but also ASN space, to keep working 24/7 access to the DB, where our routers can fetch info, to keep ROA infrastructure and many more. And Yes RIPE not doing well with this. Such creatures like IP brokers _MUST_ not exists. Internet resources are not for selling/renting and e.t.c. IR _ARE_ for using to can internet working at all.
We need to introduce a fee for EACH IPv4 IP address, and the amounts received should be directed to the development of IPv6 and the mechanisms of its compatibility with IPv4. For example, the development of mechanisms like IPv8.
Yes and No... RIPE should charge LIRs per resources they are holding. As more resources the LIR holds, as more the LIR have to pay. Because more resources means bigger bussiness, more clients, and more work for the RIPE staff. There is no sense to make IPV6 <-> IPV4 compability. Because there is such already. You can look to IPV6 like an extender of IPV4, for example: IPV4: 94.103.233.56 IPV6: 2001:7f8:1:1:94:103:233:56 Isnt the first 4 x 16bit numbers extending your tiny 32bit IPV4 ? Get one /32 IPV6 block from RIPE, and you can use it like IPV4 but in that /32 block you will have 18446744078004518913 times more IPs that you have in the all IPV4 address space just for you :) You can use IPV6 in the same way you use your IPV4 just change . with : if you like. But when you dive deeper in IPV6 will find much better, smarter and easier to configure ways. The biggest problem is that access providers keep buying cheaper equipment that dont always support IPV6, and what to say about IPV8 ? Cheaper equipment dont even work properly with IPV4 NAT, because it breaking contrack table and NATed IPV4 connection become unstable. Also in many fields of the application software there are no good IPV6 support or any IPV6 support. There are a lot to improve from the equipment manufacturers and software programmers (maybe better to say coders, because this days hard to find realy good and skilled programmers who knows what exactly he/she is doing). Right now I am deploying dual stack (IPV4/IPV6) network to clients of one access provider in our region. Working with epon/gpon technology, with cheap equipment, making custom onu firmwares, and know very well where are the problems I can assure you on 100% that IPV6 works much better than double treble or even four time NAT behind NAT because lack of IPV4 addresses (If you need help write me We can advice your network engineers/administrators or even make all your network dual stack).
We should direct our efforts not to reduce the budget, but to solve the general problem of the address space.
The RIPE budget _MUST_ be reduced, because tens millions euro is too much for such organisation with non commercial purposes. Money should be invested in open source projects wich creates a really good and nice software. No matter what we say, all telecoms equipments (from cisco to absolutely no name chinese one) uses linux + open source code today. And puting money in good useful and mainly working projects will help us all + will make the internet with better quality accessible to all around the globe. Ivaylo Josifov VarnaIX / Varteh LTD +359 52 969393 Varna, Bulgaria On Fri, 3 Nov 2023, sdy@a-n-t.ru wrote:
My opinion remains the same! The main task of RIPE NCC is to manage the IP address space. And unfortunately we are not doing well with this.
We need to introduce a fee for EACH IPv4 IP address, and the amounts received should be directed to the development of IPv6 and the mechanisms of its compatibility with IPv4. For example, the development of mechanisms like IPv8.
We should direct our efforts not to reduce the budget, but to solve the general problem of the address space.
On 02/11/2023 17:31, Kaj Niemi wrote:
Hi,
First, I think it is important to note that /something/?was done. They did reduce the expenditure by 3.8% (budgeted 2023 vs forecasted 2023). Could they have reduced it more? Probably, but by how much more is debatable.
This is excellent news and it shows that the EB is listening to its members. Lets hope that in future years, the budget can be further reduced by 1-3%.
Regards, Hank
_______________________________________________ members-discuss mailing list members-discuss@ripe.net https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/members-discuss Unsubscribe: https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/options/members-discuss/sdy%40a-n-t.ru
----------------------------- ? ????????? ???????? ??????? ??? "????? ??? ???????" +7(498)785-8-000 ???. +7(495)940-92-11 ???. +7(925)518-10-69 ???.
_______________________________________________ members-discuss mailing list members-discuss@ripe.net https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/members-discuss Unsubscribe: https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/options/members-discuss/ivaylo%40bglans.net