Perhaps a RIPE policy should be modified so there is no financial incentive to find loopholes and try to game the system, so this unwanted behavior would stop. For example, one-time sign-up fee for every new LIR could be bumped up, so that it is (for example) 50% more expensive than buying average /22 of IPv4 on the open market. (it could updated once a year or so if needed) Optionally, this one-time price could be significantly reduced if new LIR forfeits its /22 of IPv4 from RIPE (opting instead to get smaller range elsewhere or even eventually go IPv6 only) If new LIR is in it for legit business, it won't be such a big deal (especially as all other similar competitors on the market will have to do the same). But if they want to become LIR *ONLY* so they buy and resold IPv4 addressspace for profit, it won't be interesting to them anymore. It also shouldn't case problems for existing members (as it won't affect them). Regards, Matija On Wed, Jan 09, 2019 at 11:27:40AM +0100, Sebastian Wiesinger wrote:
* Angelo Broccoli <angelo.broccoli@topnet.it> [2019-01-09 11:10]:
I do.
we are undergoing the same request due a resource trasfer with the offering parties that's going to close.
Yes some people do, but we have over 20k LIRs. That means in perspective that very few people are complaining. I'm not saying noone does.
Many of those that complain (and I'm not saying you are one of them) are complaining because then want more IPv4 space for cheap/free which is simply not possible. They can go to the open market or accept that there simply isn't enough and think about how to manage that.
Instead we have this tiresome discussions every bloody time there is a change to close loopholes that these marvelous entrepreneurs try to use.
Regards Sebastian
-- Opinions above are GNU-copylefted.