My guess is that they run the unsubscribe service used by Ripe so let’s hope they fix it soon !! J

 

 

Bart

 

Van: members-discuss [mailto:members-discuss-bounces@ripe.net] Namens ??????? ?. ????????
Verzonden: maandag 14 mei 2018 16:13
Aan: Daniel Pearson <daniel@privatesystems.net>; Adrian Bolster <Adrian.Bolster@purebroadband.net>; Anas Tablieh <ATablieh@sierrawireless.com>; members-discuss@ripe.net
Onderwerp: Re: [members-discuss] VL: IP transfer (in)security

 

Some guys from Hungary open a case when get e-mail for this maillist.  )

 

 

Капсалов Ярослав

yk@sistele.com

 

Компания «СИС Телеком»

+7 (495) 825-26-27

пр-т Андропова, дом 22, г. Москва, 115533 (БЦ "Нагатинский")

http://www.sistele.com/

From: members-discuss <members-discuss-bounces@ripe.net> on behalf of Daniel Pearson <daniel@privatesystems.net>
Organization: PrivateSystems
Date: Monday, 14 May 2018 at 17:08
To: Adrian Bolster <Adrian.Bolster@purebroadband.net>, Anas Tablieh <ATablieh@sierrawireless.com>, "members-discuss@ripe.net" <members-discuss@ripe.net>
Subject: Re: [members-discuss] VL: IP transfer (in)security

 

It seems most people don't look at the links and click the first unsubscribe link they find, half the time not associated with their email address.

I get them too... I blame technology for dumbing things down so people don't think. :)

On 05/14/2018 08:24 AM, Adrian Bolster wrote:

Go on then… who tried to unsubscribe me?

 

From: members-discuss <members-discuss-bounces@ripe.net> On Behalf Of Daniel Pearson
Sent: 14 May 2018 13:50
To: Anas Tablieh <ATablieh@sierrawireless.com>; members-discuss@ripe.net
Subject: Re: [members-discuss] VL: IP transfer (in)security

 

Well, use your email address and reset it :)

On 05/14/2018 07:48 AM, Anas Tablieh wrote:

 

unsubscribe link need a password !!

 

From: Daniel Pearson <daniel@privatesystems.net>
Sent: lundi 14 mai 2018 14:48
To: Anas Tablieh <ATablieh@sierrawireless.com>; members-discuss@ripe.net
Subject: Re: [members-discuss] VL: IP transfer (in)security

 

Hi there,

This is a mailing list, please use the unsubscribe link at the bottom of these emails that is associated with your email address!



On 05/14/2018 07:45 AM, Anas Tablieh wrote:

Please remove my mail address from this chat !!!!!!

 

 

From: members-discuss <members-discuss-bounces@ripe.net> On Behalf Of Daniel Pearson
Sent: lundi 14 mai 2018 14:25
To: members-discuss@ripe.net
Subject: Re: [members-discuss] VL: IP transfer (in)security

 

I concur, there is no legal leg to stand on to force space to be returned. It just cannot happen, end period. Thinking about it is nothing but a fantasy and we live in reality.

What your asking is no different than having a complete stranger walk up to your house, admire your big empty back yard, demand that you give it to them because they want to build a house in your neighborhood and well, you don't use your backyard so why can't they have it for free?



On 05/14/2018 07:05 AM, Peter Linder wrote:

But there is no point in arguing this. It has been discussed over and over:

It is not feasible to "reclaim" legacy space, just because you want it for free or at a very low cost. Current holders have a good legal ground to refuse.  Even if it was somehow reclaimed on a large scale, it would last for a year or so? Remember, most addresses would need to go to countries with large populations where Internet is not built up like it is in Europe or North America. Then what? Even if RIPE could reallocate addresses to last a few more years it would mean even *more* work to do v6, not less.

Just buy the addresses you need, if more than RIPE will allocate to you. I know this sucks, especially in poorer countries. But that is probably the only way your business is going to happen, in the short term. An alternative would be to bother the IETF to release their reserved space but that is probably a waste of time (never mind de-bogonizing it).

Right now IPv4 shortage is hurting a little because of cost. It will eventually start hurting more, and in different ways. There are ways to prepare for that, including making sure v6 is enabled and functioning on everything you make.

/Peter

 

 

Den 2018-05-14 kl. 13:38, skrev David Benwell:

No its about preventing the waste of IP Addresses. Why allow a LLR to retain address space that they may never have used.

 

 

 

From: members-discuss [mailto:members-discuss-bounces@ripe.net] On Behalf Of William
Sent: 14 May 2018 12:32
To: Bunea TELECOM <suport@bunea.eu>
Cc: members-discuss@ripe.net
Subject: Re: [members-discuss] VL: IP transfer (in)security

 

But this does not CHANGE IT IS THEFT, please have a look at your history (or here in Croatia) - you want to do the same, steal from some parts of the society ('the rich') to 'benefit' the whole which ends horribly wrong.

 

This discussion is almost as absurd as the Russian suggestion to move RIPE to Moscow.

 

--

William Weber

Consulting, Security & Management - Tel-Aviv, Israel / Rijeka, Croatia

 

https://ip6.im - No RIPE LIR? Still read this email for some reason? Grab a /40 *free* IPv6 space for BGP usage. Or just get it anyway, can't hurt to have.

 

 

 

On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 13:16, Bunea TELECOM <suport@bunea.eu> wrote:

Everybody that says it’s theft, please consider the fact that those ‘guys’ got their hands on /8 blocks tens of years ago, and probably did not pay a dime for them.

In the light of events, one /8, respecting the 1024 IPv4 policy that RIPE has, would belong to over 16.000 LIR accounts!

And I must say, 16.000 companies would create a lot of business compared to one company that holds a /8 :)

 

Thanks

—

 


imap://daniel%40knownhost%2Ecom@mail.knownhost.com:143/fetch%3EUID%3E.INBOX%3E303885?header=quotebody&part=1.2&filename=image001.jpg





Petru Bunea / CEO 
suport@bunea.eu / +40752481282

Bunea TELECOM / DATACENTER / APP DEVELOPMENT
http://www.bunea.eu / +40745495495




 

On 14 May 2018, at 14:16, Alex Lobachov <alxl@telenet.lv> wrote:

 

Bruno has it’s point.

 

Legacy parts of the space should be reclaimed, but only ICANN has the power to do so.

 

I don’t like to call it a thief, I’d rather say as all IP space is rented (owning a number isn’t bright), all that rented space, wherever it is legacy or current should be re-audited to justify the reason of use.

 


--
Alex Lobachov
Telenet, sia
Network Systems Engineer
LinkedIn: https://lv.linkedin.com/in/allxll
E-mail: alxl@telenet.lv
Skype: alxl__
Direct office: +371 67886224
Office: +371 67711111

 

Sent: Monday, May 14, 2018 2:04 PM

Subject: Re: [members-discuss] VL: IP transfer (in)security

 

William,

Legacy or not, at one point a regulation was introduced. And everyone should be regulated (pre-RIR or not).

Is the same has if you own a car from back the traffic laws (1800 years?). If you drive it now, you have to comply with all the laws that regulate the sector.
Why the legacy address space owners shouldn't have to comply with the actual regulations?

If we look deep on the spaces between 0.0.0.0 and 255.255.255.255 (that are not local or bogons), i bet that most than 50% are legacy and not used.

---

Image removed by sender. XRV

Bruno Carvalho (CEO xrv.pt) | +351 300 404 316
P Please consider the environment before printing this email

Image removed by sender. Visit our website
Image removed by sender. FacebookImage removed by sender. Twitter

 

On 2018-05-14 12:46, William wrote:

 

These are legacy. They are not RIR business.

 

No RIR can reclaim them (and reclaim is plainly wrong, they never owned them, this is pre-RIR space), they are private property.

 

Taking them is theft and nothing else, no matter how you phrase it.

 

--

William Weber

Consulting, Security & Management - Tel-Aviv, Israel / Rijeka, Croatia

 

https://ip6.im - No RIPE LIR? Still read this email for some reason? Grab a /40 *free* IPv6 space for BGP usage. Or just get it anyway, can't hurt to have.

 

 

 

 

On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 12:27, Bunea TELECOM <suport@bunea.eu> wrote:

I agree,

 

There are tens of /8's available, some of them even unannounced. For example there are lots of entities which if they would gave up (even partially) of their unused blocks, it would push the IPv4 complete exaustion to 2020+.

 

Thanks,

Petru

—

 


<email-signature.jpg>





Petru Bunea / CEO 
suport@bunea.eu / +40752481282

Bunea TELECOM / DATACENTER / APP DEVELOPMENT
http://www.bunea.eu / +40745495495




 

On 14 May 2018, at 11:20, Janarthanan Sundaram <j.sundaram@123telcom.nl> wrote:

 

I think we should prioritize on on point two: what to do with unused blocks.


 

Van: members-discuss <members-discuss-bounces@ripe.net> Namens Bruno Carvalho
Verzonden: maandag 14 mei 2018 10:11
Aan: members-discuss@ripe.net
Onderwerp: Re: [members-discuss] VL: IP transfer (in)security

 

This discussion is quite interesting. But i think it should be discussed between all RiRs. Not only for RIPE.
When we look at big companies, like Microsoft, and do a simple scan of their assigned IP ranges... we found some /14 and several /16 unassigned/unused ranges.


Personnally, i think we should focus on 2 main things:


- Improve IPv6 implementation all over the territory (i know this is painfull for many LIRs because it implies additional work and purchase of new equipments. But let's face it. We are in 2018. If an equipment doesn't support IPv6, it's very obsolete and not performant).


- Check with the other RiRs what would be the best to do with those big unused ranges that are owned by companies that don't use them.


Regards




---

<blocked.gif>

Bruno Carvalho (CEO xrv.pt) | +351 300 404 316
P Please consider the environment before printing this email

<blocked.gif>
<blocked.gif><blocked.gif>


 

On 2018-05-14 09:51, Hans Govenius wrote:






Hello

Not needed IP = The addressese company is ready to sell for a small profit 😊 ? This is probably good indication that its not used anymore. One option is to automatically block all and any IP transaction which does not involve transaction of the whole company/business. It is a question that can IP be a commodity. Now its a commodity that is getting more rare by the year. Maybe IP should be considered an jointly owned part of infrastructure which is deployed by need basis. (Socialistic way)

Other option is to start to take money per IP. This would instantly mean that everyone would look up to own ip spaces. Let say it would cost 1 euro / year for a IP it would only be approx 1000 euros for the smallest allocation. Someone with 10 million IP addressese are likely to happily pay for it fi they are in use, but if they are not i would think they would be handed back. (Capitalistic way)

One option is also to go with the current system because internet is working so its not horribly wrong at the moment either. 

One interesting this is tho that old LIR:s are likely to wanting to keep these things unchanged. New LIR:s are more likely to want changes as this is heavily favoring old LIR:s. And every year a proportionally larger part will be the ones with few IP:s and same vote than the one with alot of IP:s and also only 1 vote. 

Br. Hans 




-----Alkuperäinen viesti-----
Lähettäjä: members-discuss <members-discuss-bounces@ripe.net> Puolesta REG ID: pl.skonet
Lähetetty: maanantai 14. toukokuuta 2018 10.34
Vastaanottaja: pdonner@znak.fi; members-discuss@ripe.net
Aihe: Re: [members-discuss] VL: IP transfer (in)security

W dniu 14.05.2018 o 09:25, Philip Donner pisze: 


I would like to amplify Dave's good proposal, by suggesting that unused addresses should be handed back to RIPE, so that they can be added to a pool of addresses reserved for LIRs who needs them for non-profit promotion of IP networks.





Ok, but there is never ending story to resolve: how to define 'unused addresses'. Because not announced in BGP definitely != not used.

--

Tomasz Śląski
pl.skonet


_______________________________________________
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/hans.govenius%40devnet.fi
_______________________________________________
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/bruno.carvalho%40xrv.pt

_______________________________________________
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/suport%40bunea.eu

 

 

_______________________________________________
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/alxl%40telenet.lv

_______________________________________________
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/suport%40bunea.eu

 






_______________________________________________
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/peter%40fiberdirekt.se







_______________________________________________
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/daniel%40privatesystems.net