That's not viable yet, have you seen how fragmented th v6
table is, even Tier 1 ISPs have gaps.
I would argue that we just reduce the allocation for
additional LIRs. That is if a single legal entity (or it's
subsidiaries) register a new LIR, then the new LIR registered
can only receive a /24 not a /22.
This way no one would act in bad faith trying to skirt the
rules, and young ISPs still have the ability to grow without
feeling significantly choked.
-Tim
On 11/02/16 17:02, Janis
Jaunosans wrote:
just get ipv6.
On 11/02/16 17:58, Matthias Šubik wrote:
Additionally …
On 11.02.2016, at 16:26, Simon
Lockhart <s.lockhart@cablecomnetworking.co.uk>
wrote:
On Thu Feb 11, 2016 at 04:22:14PM +0100, Sebastian
Wiesinger wrote:
* Nigel Titley <exec-board@ripe.net>
[2016-02-11 12:02]:
2. If this activity is a
problem that must be prevented, what action
should the RIPE NCC take to attempt its prevention?
Do not allow additional LIR accounts for a member.
I would concur.
One legal entity, one LIR. This should be easy for RIPE
to implement, given
that they require evidence of company registration or
equivalent when
establishing an LIR.
Even if it is possible to open more legal entities in the
RIPE region, when requiring an exclusive contact person it
makes it not any harder for really new members, but harder
for self cloning of members.
It might even be needed, to require the new contact person
to complete the RIPE course, to slow down abusive
behavior.
The use of a simple nominee is therefor more difficult
than without the course requirement.
just my two cents
Matthias