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.
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.
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.
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
I
think we should prioritize on on point two: what to do with unused
blocks.
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
|
|
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.
_______________________________________________members-discuss
mailing listmembers-discuss@ripe.nethttps://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/members-discussUnsubscribe:
https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/options/members-discuss/suport%40bunea.eu
_______________________________________________
members-discuss mailing
list
members-discuss@ripe.nethttps://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/members-discuss
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/options/members-discuss/alxl%40telenet.lv
