Multiple LIR account mergers
Hello, all. What do you think if the NCC allow to merge accounts of the same company without 24 months restriction? I thing this question should be discussed on the RIPE meeting in Marseille. ----- Kind regards, Alexey
Hi, On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 01:07:20PM +0000, Aleksey Bulgakov wrote:
What do you think if the NCC allow to merge accounts of the same company without 24 months restriction?
I thing this question should be discussed on the RIPE meeting in Marseille.
"Again"? Gert Doering -- NetMaster -- have you enabled IPv6 on something today...? SpaceNet AG Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard, Michael Emmer Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann D-80807 Muenchen HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen) Tel: +49 (0)89/32356-444 USt-IdNr.: DE813185279
Simple question - WHY? This restriction is there to reduce number of speculative members/accounts created to bypass spirit of IPv4 Address Allocation and Assignment Policies (to obtain more than single /22 from last pool). Expense reduction of those organisations isn't valid argument here. I *don't* support this idea at all. With regards, Daniel On 04/30/2018 03:07 PM, Aleksey Bulgakov wrote:
Hello, all.
What do you think if the NCC allow to merge accounts of the same company without 24 months restriction?
I thing this question should be discussed on the RIPE meeting in Marseille.
----- Kind regards, Alexey
_______________________________________________ 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/danny%40danysek.cz
I think it would be great! Best regards, Dmitry Vorozhtsov. 2018-04-30 22:07 GMT+09:00 Aleksey Bulgakov <aleksbulgakov@gmail.com>:
Hello, all.
What do you think if the NCC allow to merge accounts of the same company without 24 months restriction?
I thing this question should be discussed on the RIPE meeting in Marseille.
----- Kind regards, Alexey
_______________________________________________ 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/dvorozhtsov%40gmail.com
YES! Probably this would be possible... ...just setting the RIPE sign-up fee of 4600 EUR that includes the first two years of membership in a non refoundable way ( : Thomas Il 01/05/2018 10:45, Dmitry Vorozhtsov ha scritto:
I think it would be great!
Best regards, Dmitry Vorozhtsov.
2018-04-30 22:07 GMT+09:00 Aleksey Bulgakov <aleksbulgakov@gmail.com <mailto:aleksbulgakov@gmail.com>>:
Hello, all.
What do you think if the NCC allow to merge accounts of the same company without 24 months restriction?
I thing this question should be discussed on the RIPE meeting in Marseille.
----- Kind regards, Alexey
_______________________________________________ members-discuss mailing list members-discuss@ripe.net <mailto:members-discuss@ripe.net> https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/members-discuss <https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/members-discuss> Unsubscribe: https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/options/members-discuss/dvorozhtsov%40gmail.c... <https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/options/members-discuss/dvorozhtsov%40gmail.com>
_______________________________________________ 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/thomas%40niceblue.it
-- -- Thomas Gallo @ Nice Blue s.r.l. Centro Direzionale Interporto Padova - Torre B Galleria Spagna, 35 - 35127 PADOVA (PD) Fixed phone: +39 (0)49 85 94 766 Fax line: +39 (0)49 82 51 032
As someone that would profit from this i am absolutely against it. RIPE exists for specific reasons - selling out IPs is not one of them, and the legacy market as well as inter-RIR transfers cover the business needs at this time. The current merger rules are a good middle way. --William WeberConsulting, Security & Management - Tel-Aviv, Israel / Rijeka, Croatia https://ip6.im (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 Tue, May 1, 2018 at 13:17, Thomas Gallo - Nice Blue srl wrote: YES! Probably this would be possible... ...just setting the RIPE sign-up fee of 4600 EUR that includes the first two years of membership in a non refoundable way ( : Thomas Il 01/05/2018 10:45, Dmitry Vorozhtsov ha scritto: I think it would be great! Best regards, Dmitry Vorozhtsov. 2018-04-30 22:07 GMT+09:00 Aleksey Bulgakov : Hello, all. What do you think if the NCC allow to merge accounts of the same company without 24 months restriction? I thing this question should be discussed on the RIPE meeting in Marseille. ----- Kind regards, Alexey _______________________________________________ members-discuss mailing list members-discuss@ripe.net (mailto:members-discuss@ripe.net) https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/members-discuss (https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/members-discuss) Unsubscribe: https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/options/members-discuss/dvorozhtsov%40gmail.c... (https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/options/members-discuss/dvorozhtsov%40gmail.c...) _______________________________________________ members-discuss mailing list members-discuss@ripe.net (mailto:members-discuss@ripe.net) https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/members-discuss (https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/members-discuss) Unsubscribe: https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/options/members-discuss/thomas%40niceblue.it (https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/options/members-discuss/thomas%40niceblue.it) -- -- Thomas Gallo @ Nice Blue s.r.l. Centro Direzionale Interporto Padova - Torre B Galleria Spagna, 35 - 35127 PADOVA (PD) Fixed phone: +39 (0)49 85 94 766 Fax line: +39 (0)49 82 51 032
The current rules are a good middle ground, however, as a relatively new ISP we can only access one /22 per LIR. Newer entities, such as us, do not have legacy IPv4 space which immediately inhibits growth and competition in the ISP marketplace. A fairer policy would be to allocate for a LIR’s justifiable needs, taking into account their current allocations; but for RIPE to retain an override on these allocations. By monitoring for any unused space it would be possible to remove any unused to be recycled. Also, governments and larger organisations are sat on huge IPv4 real estate that is not in use. This is another area that needs exploring. After all, IPv6 isn’t ubiquitous yet, so something constructive has to be done. From: members-discuss <members-discuss-bounces@ripe.net> On Behalf Of William Sent: 01 May 2018 18:15 To: Thomas Gallo - Nice Blue srl <thomas@niceblue.it> Cc: members-discuss@ripe.net Subject: Re: [members-discuss] Multiple LIR account mergers As someone that would profit from this i am absolutely against it. RIPE exists for specific reasons - selling out IPs is not one of them, and the legacy market as well as inter-RIR transfers cover the business needs at this time. The current merger rules are a good middle way. -- William Weber Consulting, Security & Management - Tel-Aviv, Israel / Rijeka, Croatia https://ip6.im<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 Tue, May 1, 2018 at 13:17, Thomas Gallo - Nice Blue srl <thomas@niceblue.it<mailto:thomas@niceblue.it>> wrote: YES! Probably this would be possible... ...just setting the RIPE sign-up fee of 4600 EUR that includes the first two years of membership in a non refoundable way ( : Thomas Il 01/05/2018 10:45, Dmitry Vorozhtsov ha scritto: I think it would be great! Best regards, Dmitry Vorozhtsov. 2018-04-30 22:07 GMT+09:00 Aleksey Bulgakov <aleksbulgakov@gmail.com<mailto:aleksbulgakov@gmail.com>>: Hello, all. What do you think if the NCC allow to merge accounts of the same company without 24 months restriction? I thing this question should be discussed on the RIPE meeting in Marseille. ----- Kind regards, Alexey _______________________________________________ members-discuss mailing list members-discuss@ripe.net<mailto:members-discuss@ripe.net> https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/members-discuss Unsubscribe: https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/options/members-discuss/dvorozhtsov%40gmail.c... _______________________________________________ members-discuss mailing list members-discuss@ripe.net<mailto:members-discuss@ripe.net> https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/members-discuss Unsubscribe: https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/options/members-discuss/thomas%40niceblue.it -- -- Thomas Gallo @ Nice Blue s.r.l. Centro Direzionale Interporto Padova - Torre B Galleria Spagna, 35 - 35127 PADOVA (PD) Fixed phone: +39 (0)49 85 94 766 Fax line: +39 (0)49 82 51 032
I agree with this. From: members-discuss [mailto:members-discuss-bounces@ripe.net] On Behalf Of Adrian Bolster Sent: 02 May 2018 09:46 To: William <william@william.si>; Thomas Gallo - Nice Blue srl <thomas@niceblue.it> Cc: members-discuss@ripe.net Subject: Re: [members-discuss] Multiple LIR account mergers The current rules are a good middle ground, however, as a relatively new ISP we can only access one /22 per LIR. Newer entities, such as us, do not have legacy IPv4 space which immediately inhibits growth and competition in the ISP marketplace. A fairer policy would be to allocate for a LIR’s justifiable needs, taking into account their current allocations; but for RIPE to retain an override on these allocations. By monitoring for any unused space it would be possible to remove any unused to be recycled. Also, governments and larger organisations are sat on huge IPv4 real estate that is not in use. This is another area that needs exploring. After all, IPv6 isn’t ubiquitous yet, so something constructive has to be done. From: members-discuss <members-discuss-bounces@ripe.net<mailto:members-discuss-bounces@ripe.net>> On Behalf Of William Sent: 01 May 2018 18:15 To: Thomas Gallo - Nice Blue srl <thomas@niceblue.it<mailto:thomas@niceblue.it>> Cc: members-discuss@ripe.net<mailto:members-discuss@ripe.net> Subject: Re: [members-discuss] Multiple LIR account mergers As someone that would profit from this i am absolutely against it. RIPE exists for specific reasons - selling out IPs is not one of them, and the legacy market as well as inter-RIR transfers cover the business needs at this time. The current merger rules are a good middle way. -- William Weber Consulting, Security & Management - Tel-Aviv, Israel / Rijeka, Croatia https://ip6.im<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 Tue, May 1, 2018 at 13:17, Thomas Gallo - Nice Blue srl <thomas@niceblue.it<mailto:thomas@niceblue.it>> wrote: YES! Probably this would be possible... ...just setting the RIPE sign-up fee of 4600 EUR that includes the first two years of membership in a non refoundable way ( : Thomas Il 01/05/2018 10:45, Dmitry Vorozhtsov ha scritto: I think it would be great! Best regards, Dmitry Vorozhtsov. 2018-04-30 22:07 GMT+09:00 Aleksey Bulgakov <aleksbulgakov@gmail.com<mailto:aleksbulgakov@gmail.com>>: Hello, all. What do you think if the NCC allow to merge accounts of the same company without 24 months restriction? I thing this question should be discussed on the RIPE meeting in Marseille. ----- Kind regards, Alexey _______________________________________________ members-discuss mailing list members-discuss@ripe.net<mailto:members-discuss@ripe.net> https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/members-discuss Unsubscribe: https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/options/members-discuss/dvorozhtsov%40gmail.c... _______________________________________________ members-discuss mailing list members-discuss@ripe.net<mailto:members-discuss@ripe.net> https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/members-discuss Unsubscribe: https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/options/members-discuss/thomas%40niceblue.it -- -- Thomas Gallo @ Nice Blue s.r.l. Centro Direzionale Interporto Padova - Torre B Galleria Spagna, 35 - 35127 PADOVA (PD) Fixed phone: +39 (0)49 85 94 766 Fax line: +39 (0)49 82 51 032
Hi, On Wed, May 02, 2018 at 08:46:23AM +0000, Adrian Bolster wrote:
A fairer policy would be to allocate for a LIR???s justifiable needs, taking into account their current allocations; but for RIPE to retain an override on these allocations. By monitoring for any unused space it would be possible to remove any unused to be recycled.
I would guess that 90% of all LIRs that joined in the last year have need for more IPv4 space. So if the RIPE NCC were to give them more space, the remaining pool would be empty over night. The compromise we have is "*you* got your /22, because everybody *else* refrained from receiving all they need". There is no way to fulfill "all I need!" for every LIR out there with the remaining IPv4 space - so if you get more, someone else will get nothing at all. Gert Doering -- NetMaster -- have you enabled IPv6 on something today...? SpaceNet AG Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard, Michael Emmer Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann D-80807 Muenchen HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen) Tel: +49 (0)89/32356-444 USt-IdNr.: DE813185279
Greetings, On Wed, 2 May 2018, Adrian Bolster wrote:
The current rules are a good middle ground, however, as a relatively new ISP we can only access one /22 per LIR. Newer entities, such as us, do not have legacy IPv4 space which immediately inhibits growth and competition in the ISP marketplace.
It seems "legacy IPv4" space can also be achieved through the market...
A fairer policy would be to allocate for a LIR?s justifiable needs,
That was the "pre-2012" era... :-)
taking into account their current allocations; but for RIPE to retain an override on these allocations. By monitoring for any unused space it would be possible to remove any unused to be recycled.
IPv4 space, whether we like it or not, has value. There is no (global) routing authority, as there is no (global) usage authority, so this hipotetic "monitoring" has no real sense.
Also, governments and larger organisations are sat on huge IPv4 real estate
Which governments exactly? Which "larger" (than what?) organisations exactly? If it's "real estate", do you think anyone will hand it over for free?
that is not in use.
This may be hard to determine, as addresses can be used in (semi-)private environments.
This is another area that needs exploring.
I don't think so. Let's agree to disagree. :-)
After all, IPv6 isn?t ubiquitous yet, so something constructive has to be done.
Yes -- Work to make IPv6 ubiquitous :-) Regards, Carlos Friaças
From: members-discuss <members-discuss-bounces@ripe.net> On Behalf Of William Sent: 01 May 2018 18:15 To: Thomas Gallo - Nice Blue srl <thomas@niceblue.it> Cc: members-discuss@ripe.net Subject: Re: [members-discuss] Multiple LIR account mergers
As someone that would profit from this i am absolutely against it.
RIPE exists for specific reasons - selling out IPs is not one of them, and the legacy market as well as inter-RIR transfers cover the business needs at this time.
The current merger rules are a good middle way.
--
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 Tue, May 1, 2018 at 13:17, Thomas Gallo - Nice Blue srl <thomas@niceblue.it> wrote:
YES! Probably this would be possible... ...just setting the RIPE sign-up fee of 4600 EUR that includes the first two years of membership in a non refoundable way ( :
Thomas
Il 01/05/2018 10:45, Dmitry Vorozhtsov ha scritto:
I think it would be great!
Best regards, Dmitry Vorozhtsov.
2018-04-30 22:07 GMT+09:00 Aleksey Bulgakov <aleksbulgakov@gmail.com>:
Hello, all.
What do you think if the NCC allow to merge accounts of the same company without 24 months restriction?
I thing this question should be discussed on the RIPE meeting in Marseille.
-----
Kind regards,
Alexey
_______________________________________________ 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/dvorozhtsov%40gmail.c...
_______________________________________________
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/thomas%40niceblue.it
--
--
Thomas Gallo @ Nice Blue s.r.l.
Centro Direzionale Interporto Padova - Torre B
Galleria Spagna, 35 - 35127 PADOVA (PD)
Fixed phone: +39 (0)49 85 94 766
Fax line: +39 (0)49 82 51 032
I support what Adrian has said here. As a small ISP we don’t have enough addresses to cover all of our customers, let alone our own infrastructure as well. Prices from brokers are in the region of EUR12 per IP, which is simply not possible to justify for a small company. The problems of not having enough addresses means relying on CGNAT to get customers connected, and all the issues that come with it. Not such a problem for mobile providers, but providers of fixed-line broadband have a much harder time with this technology. Sure IPv6 is the solution, but until we’re past the threshold where the majority of content is IPv6 enabled we still have to supply public IPv4 addresses to all customers in some form. I’d like to see governments selling its stock of unused addresses to local business that can prove a need at an affordable price. Everyone wants to sell their IPs to fund their own IPv6 rollouts. Great, so the little guys have to spend their cash on extortionate IPv4 prices just to keep up, stalling or preventing their own IPv6 rollouts, while the bigger players get their rollouts partially funded. If businesses can show they’re planning to or currently rolling out IPv6, they should have fairer access to IPv4 resources while they continue those plans. I think the RIRs need to step in and help here. From: members-discuss <members-discuss-bounces@ripe.net> On Behalf Of Adrian Bolster Sent: 02 May 2018 09:46 To: William <william@william.si>; Thomas Gallo - Nice Blue srl <thomas@niceblue.it> Cc: members-discuss@ripe.net Subject: Re: [members-discuss] Multiple LIR account mergers The current rules are a good middle ground, however, as a relatively new ISP we can only access one /22 per LIR. Newer entities, such as us, do not have legacy IPv4 space which immediately inhibits growth and competition in the ISP marketplace. A fairer policy would be to allocate for a LIR’s justifiable needs, taking into account their current allocations; but for RIPE to retain an override on these allocations. By monitoring for any unused space it would be possible to remove any unused to be recycled. Also, governments and larger organisations are sat on huge IPv4 real estate that is not in use. This is another area that needs exploring. After all, IPv6 isn’t ubiquitous yet, so something constructive has to be done. From: members-discuss <members-discuss-bounces@ripe.net<mailto:members-discuss-bounces@ripe.net>> On Behalf Of William Sent: 01 May 2018 18:15 To: Thomas Gallo - Nice Blue srl <thomas@niceblue.it<mailto:thomas@niceblue.it>> Cc: members-discuss@ripe.net<mailto:members-discuss@ripe.net> Subject: Re: [members-discuss] Multiple LIR account mergers As someone that would profit from this i am absolutely against it. RIPE exists for specific reasons - selling out IPs is not one of them, and the legacy market as well as inter-RIR transfers cover the business needs at this time. The current merger rules are a good middle way. -- William Weber Consulting, Security & Management - Tel-Aviv, Israel / Rijeka, Croatia https://ip6.im<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 Tue, May 1, 2018 at 13:17, Thomas Gallo - Nice Blue srl <thomas@niceblue.it<mailto:thomas@niceblue.it>> wrote: YES! Probably this would be possible... ...just setting the RIPE sign-up fee of 4600 EUR that includes the first two years of membership in a non refoundable way ( : Thomas Il 01/05/2018 10:45, Dmitry Vorozhtsov ha scritto: I think it would be great! Best regards, Dmitry Vorozhtsov. 2018-04-30 22:07 GMT+09:00 Aleksey Bulgakov <aleksbulgakov@gmail.com<mailto:aleksbulgakov@gmail.com>>: Hello, all. What do you think if the NCC allow to merge accounts of the same company without 24 months restriction? I thing this question should be discussed on the RIPE meeting in Marseille. ----- Kind regards, Alexey _______________________________________________ members-discuss mailing list members-discuss@ripe.net<mailto:members-discuss@ripe.net> https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/members-discuss Unsubscribe: https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/options/members-discuss/dvorozhtsov%40gmail.c... _______________________________________________ members-discuss mailing list members-discuss@ripe.net<mailto:members-discuss@ripe.net> https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/members-discuss Unsubscribe: https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/options/members-discuss/thomas%40niceblue.it -- -- Thomas Gallo @ Nice Blue s.r.l. Centro Direzionale Interporto Padova - Torre B Galleria Spagna, 35 - 35127 PADOVA (PD) Fixed phone: +39 (0)49 85 94 766 Fax line: +39 (0)49 82 51 032
Implementing the native IPv6 and CGNAT means you need twice (for now) less powerful (and less expensive) CGNAT device. And you can always have point-to-point connectivity. That what I miss for our and EU mobile carriers... 02.05.18 14:47, Craig Arnold пише:
I support what Adrian has said here. As a small ISP we don’t have enough addresses to cover all of our customers, let alone our own infrastructure as well. Prices from brokers are in the region of EUR12 per IP, which is simply not possible to justify for a small company. The problems of not having enough addresses means relying on CGNAT to get customers connected, and all the issues that come with it. Not such a problem for mobile providers, but providers of fixed-line broadband have a much harder time with this technology.
Sure IPv6 is the solution, but until we’re past the threshold where the majority of content is IPv6 enabled we still have to supply public IPv4 addresses to all customers in some form.
I’d like to see governments selling its stock of unused addresses to local business that can prove a need at an affordable price. Everyone wants to sell their IPs to fund their own IPv6 rollouts. Great, so the little guys have to spend their cash on extortionate IPv4 prices just to keep up, stalling or preventing their own IPv6 rollouts, while the bigger players get their rollouts partially funded. If businesses can show they’re planning to or currently rolling out IPv6, they should have fairer access to IPv4 resources while they continue those plans. I think the RIRs need to step in and help here.
*From:*members-discuss <members-discuss-bounces@ripe.net> *On Behalf Of *Adrian Bolster *Sent:* 02 May 2018 09:46 *To:* William <william@william.si>; Thomas Gallo - Nice Blue srl <thomas@niceblue.it> *Cc:* members-discuss@ripe.net *Subject:* Re: [members-discuss] Multiple LIR account mergers
The current rules are a good middle ground, however, as a relatively new ISP we can only access one /22 per LIR. Newer entities, such as us, do not have legacy IPv4 space which immediately inhibits growth and competition in the ISP marketplace.
A fairer policy would be to allocate for a LIR’s justifiable needs, taking into account their current allocations; but for RIPE to retain an override on these allocations. By monitoring for any unused space it would be possible to remove any unused to be recycled.
Also, governments and larger organisations are sat on huge IPv4 real estate that is not in use. This is another area that needs exploring.
After all, IPv6 isn’t ubiquitous yet, so something constructive has to be done.
*From:*members-discuss <members-discuss-bounces@ripe.net <mailto:members-discuss-bounces@ripe.net>> *On Behalf Of *William *Sent:* 01 May 2018 18:15 *To:* Thomas Gallo - Nice Blue srl <thomas@niceblue.it <mailto:thomas@niceblue.it>> *Cc:* members-discuss@ripe.net <mailto:members-discuss@ripe.net> *Subject:* Re: [members-discuss] Multiple LIR account mergers
As someone that would profit from this i am absolutely against it.
RIPE exists for specific reasons - selling out IPs is not one of them, and the legacy market as well as inter-RIR transfers cover the business needs at this time.
The current merger rules are a good middle way.
--
William Weber
Consulting, Security & Management - Tel-Aviv, Israel / Rijeka, Croatia
https://ip6.im <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 Tue, May 1, 2018 at 13:17, Thomas Gallo - Nice Blue srl <thomas@niceblue.it <mailto:thomas@niceblue.it>> wrote:
YES! Probably this would be possible... ...just setting the RIPE sign-up fee of 4600 EUR that includes the first two years of membership in a non refoundable way ( :
Thomas
Il 01/05/2018 10:45, Dmitry Vorozhtsov ha scritto:
I think it would be great!
Best regards, Dmitry Vorozhtsov.
2018-04-30 22:07 GMT+09:00 Aleksey Bulgakov <aleksbulgakov@gmail.com <mailto:aleksbulgakov@gmail.com>>:
Hello, all.
What do you think if the NCC allow to merge accounts of the same company without 24 months restriction?
I thing this question should be discussed on the RIPE meeting in Marseille.
-----
Kind regards,
Alexey
_______________________________________________ members-discuss mailing list members-discuss@ripe.net <mailto:members-discuss@ripe.net> https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/members-discuss Unsubscribe: https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/options/members-discuss/dvorozhtsov%40gmail.c...
_______________________________________________
members-discuss mailing list
members-discuss@ripe.net <mailto:members-discuss@ripe.net>
https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/members-discuss
Unsubscribe: https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/options/members-discuss/thomas%40niceblue.it
--
--
Thomas Gallo @ Nice Blue s.r.l.
Centro Direzionale Interporto Padova - Torre B
Galleria Spagna, 35 - 35127 PADOVA (PD)
Fixed phone: +39 (0)49 85 94 766
Fax line: +39 (0)49 82 51 032
_______________________________________________ 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/maxtul%40netassist.ua
There just aren't enough IPv4 addresses left to do that. Then you bring into the immediate question is your justification better than my justification. This day and age if you're starting any internet based business that requires it's own IP space you either have to be very conservative with IPs and remain within the /22 or you have to budget accordingly and make transactions on the secondary market to increase your space. Otherwise plenty of carriers, datacenters and providers still rent/lease IPv4 on long term contracts as well. Having your own is cheaper yes, but not near as cheap as when the internet began. It's nature, things just get more expensive with time and consumption. On 05/02/2018 03:46 AM, Adrian Bolster wrote:
The current rules are a good middle ground, however, as a relatively new ISP we can only access one /22 per LIR. Newer entities, such as us, do not have legacy IPv4 space which immediately inhibits growth and competition in the ISP marketplace.
A fairer policy would be to allocate for a LIR’s justifiable needs, taking into account their current allocations; but for RIPE to retain an override on these allocations. By monitoring for any unused space it would be possible to remove any unused to be recycled.
Also, governments and larger organisations are sat on huge IPv4 real estate that is not in use. This is another area that needs exploring.
After all, IPv6 isn’t ubiquitous yet, so something constructive has to be done.
*From:*members-discuss <members-discuss-bounces@ripe.net> *On Behalf Of *William *Sent:* 01 May 2018 18:15 *To:* Thomas Gallo - Nice Blue srl <thomas@niceblue.it> *Cc:* members-discuss@ripe.net *Subject:* Re: [members-discuss] Multiple LIR account mergers
As someone that would profit from this i am absolutely against it.
RIPE exists for specific reasons - selling out IPs is not one of them, and the legacy market as well as inter-RIR transfers cover the business needs at this time.
The current merger rules are a good middle way.
--
William Weber
Consulting, Security & Management - Tel-Aviv, Israel / Rijeka, Croatia
https://ip6.im <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 Tue, May 1, 2018 at 13:17, Thomas Gallo - Nice Blue srl <thomas@niceblue.it <mailto:thomas@niceblue.it>> wrote:
YES! Probably this would be possible... ...just setting the RIPE sign-up fee of 4600 EUR that includes the first two years of membership in a non refoundable way ( :
Thomas
Il 01/05/2018 10:45, Dmitry Vorozhtsov ha scritto:
I think it would be great!
Best regards, Dmitry Vorozhtsov.
2018-04-30 22:07 GMT+09:00 Aleksey Bulgakov <aleksbulgakov@gmail.com <mailto:aleksbulgakov@gmail.com>>:
Hello, all.
What do you think if the NCC allow to merge accounts of the same company without 24 months restriction?
I thing this question should be discussed on the RIPE meeting in Marseille.
-----
Kind regards,
Alexey
_______________________________________________ members-discuss mailing list members-discuss@ripe.net <mailto:members-discuss@ripe.net> https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/members-discuss Unsubscribe: https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/options/members-discuss/dvorozhtsov%40gmail.c...
_______________________________________________
members-discuss mailing list
members-discuss@ripe.net <mailto:members-discuss@ripe.net>
https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/members-discuss
Unsubscribe: https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/options/members-discuss/thomas%40niceblue.it
--
--
Thomas Gallo @ Nice Blue s.r.l.
Centro Direzionale Interporto Padova - Torre B
Galleria Spagna, 35 - 35127 PADOVA (PD)
Fixed phone: +39 (0)49 85 94 766
Fax line: +39 (0)49 82 51 032
_______________________________________________ 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%40privatesyste...
Hello, RIPE cannot in all cases discover, if some IP space is unused. Unrouted IP prefix doesn't mean it's unused. And there're valid technical reasons, why someone may need uniquie IP address (=assinged from RIR), but not having it routed globally. With more IP allocated (old scheme) we'll out-of IPv4 addresses more quickly. And "dry" RIPE will block *all* newcomers, not only growing ones. Changing IPv4 allocation policies is topic for APWG, anyway - it's offtopic here. With regards, Daniel On 05/02/2018 10:46 AM, Adrian Bolster wrote:
The current rules are a good middle ground, however, as a relatively new ISP we can only access one /22 per LIR. Newer entities, such as us, do not have legacy IPv4 space which immediately inhibits growth and competition in the ISP marketplace.
A fairer policy would be to allocate for a LIR’s justifiable needs, taking into account their current allocations; but for RIPE to retain an override on these allocations. By monitoring for any unused space it would be possible to remove any unused to be recycled.
Also, governments and larger organisations are sat on huge IPv4 real estate that is not in use. This is another area that needs exploring.
After all, IPv6 isn’t ubiquitous yet, so something constructive has to be done.
*From:*members-discuss <members-discuss-bounces@ripe.net> *On Behalf Of *William *Sent:* 01 May 2018 18:15 *To:* Thomas Gallo - Nice Blue srl <thomas@niceblue.it> *Cc:* members-discuss@ripe.net *Subject:* Re: [members-discuss] Multiple LIR account mergers
As someone that would profit from this i am absolutely against it.
RIPE exists for specific reasons - selling out IPs is not one of them, and the legacy market as well as inter-RIR transfers cover the business needs at this time.
The current merger rules are a good middle way.
--
William Weber
Consulting, Security & Management - Tel-Aviv, Israel / Rijeka, Croatia
https://ip6.im <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 Tue, May 1, 2018 at 13:17, Thomas Gallo - Nice Blue srl <thomas@niceblue.it <mailto:thomas@niceblue.it>> wrote:
YES! Probably this would be possible... ...just setting the RIPE sign-up fee of 4600 EUR that includes the first two years of membership in a non refoundable way ( :
Thomas
Il 01/05/2018 10:45, Dmitry Vorozhtsov ha scritto:
I think it would be great!
Best regards, Dmitry Vorozhtsov.
2018-04-30 22:07 GMT+09:00 Aleksey Bulgakov <aleksbulgakov@gmail.com <mailto:aleksbulgakov@gmail.com>>:
Hello, all.
What do you think if the NCC allow to merge accounts of the same company without 24 months restriction?
I thing this question should be discussed on the RIPE meeting in Marseille.
-----
Kind regards,
Alexey
_______________________________________________ members-discuss mailing list members-discuss@ripe.net <mailto:members-discuss@ripe.net> https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/members-discuss Unsubscribe: https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/options/members-discuss/dvorozhtsov%40gmail.c...
_______________________________________________
members-discuss mailing list
members-discuss@ripe.net <mailto:members-discuss@ripe.net>
https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/members-discuss
Unsubscribe: https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/options/members-discuss/thomas%40niceblue.it
--
--
Thomas Gallo @ Nice Blue s.r.l.
Centro Direzionale Interporto Padova - Torre B
Galleria Spagna, 35 - 35127 PADOVA (PD)
Fixed phone: +39 (0)49 85 94 766
Fax line: +39 (0)49 82 51 032
_______________________________________________ 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/danny%40danysek.cz
* Adrian Bolster <Adrian.Bolster@purebroadband.net> [2018-05-02 12:53]:
The current rules are a good middle ground, however, as a relatively new ISP we can only access one /22 per LIR. Newer entities, such as us, do not have legacy IPv4 space which immediately inhibits growth and competition in the ISP marketplace.
Hi Adrian, this was discussed in the address-policy working group many, maaaany times. Please read the list archive for all the arguments and counterarguments. There is simply no way to change the fact: We're OUT of IPv4. Maybe an RIPE archivist wouldn't be such a bad idea after all. Regards Sebastian -- Sebastian Wiesinger Principal Network Architect Network & Security (ONS) noris network AG Thomas-Mann-Straße 16-20 90471 Nürnberg Deutschland Tel +49 911 9352 1335 Fax +49 911 9352 100 sebastian.wiesinger@noris.de https://www.noris.de - Mehr Leistung als Standard Vorstand: Ingo Kraupa (Vorsitzender), Joachim Astel, Jürgen Städing - Vorsitzender des Aufsichtsrats: Stefan Schnabel - AG Nürnberg HRB 17689
Hi Sebastian, All Even if you would have an archivist, the problem is that some people just don't read all that. Then there are a few folks that are only interested in how things would work better for themselves, not for the community. Rgds, Ray For Internal Use Only -----Original Message----- From: members-discuss [mailto:members-discuss-bounces@ripe.net] On Behalf Of Sebastian Wiesinger Sent: 2. toukokuuta 2018 15:47 To: members-discuss@ripe.net Subject: Re: [members-discuss] Multiple LIR account mergers * Adrian Bolster <Adrian.Bolster@purebroadband.net> [2018-05-02 12:53]:
The current rules are a good middle ground, however, as a relatively new ISP we can only access one /22 per LIR. Newer entities, such as us, do not have legacy IPv4 space which immediately inhibits growth and competition in the ISP marketplace.
Hi Adrian, this was discussed in the address-policy working group many, maaaany times. Please read the list archive for all the arguments and counterarguments. There is simply no way to change the fact: We're OUT of IPv4. Maybe an RIPE archivist wouldn't be such a bad idea after all. Regards Sebastian -- Sebastian Wiesinger Principal Network Architect Network & Security (ONS) noris network AG Thomas-Mann-Straße 16-20 90471 Nürnberg Deutschland Tel +49 911 9352 1335 Fax +49 911 9352 100 sebastian.wiesinger@noris.de https://www.noris.de - Mehr Leistung als Standard Vorstand: Ingo Kraupa (Vorsitzender), Joachim Astel, Jürgen Städing - Vorsitzender des Aufsichtsrats: Stefan Schnabel - AG Nürnberg HRB 17689 _______________________________________________ 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/raymond.jetten%40elis...
Hi Ray, I am interested in how things can work better for the community as a whole. It would be preferential, in my opinion, to turn off IPv4 routing on the Internet on the day that the last remnants are expected to be exhausted. As controversial as that is, it will properly encourage migration. We’ve all had plenty of time to lab and eek out the incompatible devices. We’ve all had opportunity to dual stack. We’ve all got plenty of IPv6 space. What’s stopping us? Adrian. Sent from my iPhone
On 3 May 2018, at 07:31, Jetten Raymond <raymond.jetten@elisa.fi> wrote:
Hi Sebastian, All
Even if you would have an archivist, the problem is that some people just don't read all that. Then there are a few folks that are only interested in how things would work better for themselves, not for the community.
Rgds,
Ray
For Internal Use Only
-----Original Message----- From: members-discuss [mailto:members-discuss-bounces@ripe.net] On Behalf Of Sebastian Wiesinger Sent: 2. toukokuuta 2018 15:47 To: members-discuss@ripe.net Subject: Re: [members-discuss] Multiple LIR account mergers
* Adrian Bolster <Adrian.Bolster@purebroadband.net> [2018-05-02 12:53]:
The current rules are a good middle ground, however, as a relatively new ISP we can only access one /22 per LIR. Newer entities, such as us, do not have legacy IPv4 space which immediately inhibits growth and competition in the ISP marketplace.
Hi Adrian,
this was discussed in the address-policy working group many, maaaany times. Please read the list archive for all the arguments and counterarguments. There is simply no way to change the fact: We're OUT of IPv4.
Maybe an RIPE archivist wouldn't be such a bad idea after all.
Regards
Sebastian
-- Sebastian Wiesinger Principal Network Architect Network & Security (ONS)
noris network AG Thomas-Mann-Straße 16-20 90471 Nürnberg Deutschland
Tel +49 911 9352 1335 Fax +49 911 9352 100
sebastian.wiesinger@noris.de https://www.noris.de - Mehr Leistung als Standard
Vorstand: Ingo Kraupa (Vorsitzender), Joachim Astel, Jürgen Städing - Vorsitzender des Aufsichtsrats: Stefan Schnabel - AG Nürnberg HRB 17689
_______________________________________________ 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/raymond.jetten%40elis...
_______________________________________________ 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/adrian.bolster%40sure...
Hi Adrian, The challenge here is that there is no such switch to turn off the ipv4 routing (or any routing), and making it happens requires a global consensus or a major resource turning off ipv4 (Facebook or Google for instance). If we don't have that consensus, we are simply disconnecting ourselves from the internet. Daniel Inviato dal mio BlackBerry, il dispositivo mobile più sicuro Messaggio originale Da: Adrian.Bolster@purebroadband.net Inviato: 3 maggio 2018 8:45 AM A: raymond.jetten@elisa.fi Cc: members-discuss@ripe.net Oggetto: Re: [members-discuss] Multiple LIR account mergers Hi Ray, I am interested in how things can work better for the community as a whole. It would be preferential, in my opinion, to turn off IPv4 routing on the Internet on the day that the last remnants are expected to be exhausted. As controversial as that is, it will properly encourage migration. We’ve all had plenty of time to lab and eek out the incompatible devices. We’ve all had opportunity to dual stack. We’ve all got plenty of IPv6 space. What’s stopping us? Adrian. Sent from my iPhone
On 3 May 2018, at 07:31, Jetten Raymond <raymond.jetten@elisa.fi> wrote:
Hi Sebastian, All
Even if you would have an archivist, the problem is that some people just don't read all that. Then there are a few folks that are only interested in how things would work better for themselves, not for the community.
Rgds,
Ray
For Internal Use Only
-----Original Message----- From: members-discuss [mailto:members-discuss-bounces@ripe.net] On Behalf Of Sebastian Wiesinger Sent: 2. toukokuuta 2018 15:47 To: members-discuss@ripe.net Subject: Re: [members-discuss] Multiple LIR account mergers
* Adrian Bolster <Adrian.Bolster@purebroadband.net> [2018-05-02 12:53]:
The current rules are a good middle ground, however, as a relatively new ISP we can only access one /22 per LIR. Newer entities, such as us, do not have legacy IPv4 space which immediately inhibits growth and competition in the ISP marketplace.
Hi Adrian,
this was discussed in the address-policy working group many, maaaany times. Please read the list archive for all the arguments and counterarguments. There is simply no way to change the fact: We're OUT of IPv4.
Maybe an RIPE archivist wouldn't be such a bad idea after all.
Regards
Sebastian
-- Sebastian Wiesinger Principal Network Architect Network & Security (ONS)
noris network AG Thomas-Mann-Straße 16-20 90471 Nürnberg Deutschland
Tel +49 911 9352 1335 Fax +49 911 9352 100
sebastian.wiesinger@noris.de https://www.noris.de - Mehr Leistung als Standard
Vorstand: Ingo Kraupa (Vorsitzender), Joachim Astel, Jürgen Städing - Vorsitzender des Aufsichtsrats: Stefan Schnabel - AG Nürnberg HRB 17689
_______________________________________________ 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/raymond.jetten%40elis...
_______________________________________________ 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/adrian.bolster%40sure...
_______________________________________________ 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.ponticello%40r...
* Adrian Bolster <Adrian.Bolster@purebroadband.net> [2018-05-03 08:44]:
Hi Ray,
I am interested in how things can work better for the community as a whole. It would be preferential, in my opinion, to turn off IPv4 routing on the Internet on the day that the last remnants are expected to be exhausted. As controversial as that is, it will properly encourage migration.
We’ve all had plenty of time to lab and eek out the incompatible devices. We’ve all had opportunity to dual stack. We’ve all got plenty of IPv6 space. What’s stopping us?
Reality. There is no way that this will happen and you probably know that yourself. This is not something that is possible in this society where everything is connected and a big part of that is still using IPv4 only. I would like to conclude this thread. If there are people that want to change the status quo they're free to submit a proposal in the apwg but I would highly suggest to start deploying IPv6 instead because the chances of a proposal succeeding are as low as the global IPv4 free pool. Regards Sebastian -- Sebastian Wiesinger Principal Network Architect Network & Security (ONS) noris network AG Thomas-Mann-Straße 16-20 90471 Nürnberg Deutschland Tel +49 911 9352 1335 Fax +49 911 9352 100 sebastian.wiesinger@noris.de https://www.noris.de - Mehr Leistung als Standard Vorstand: Ingo Kraupa (Vorsitzender), Joachim Astel, Jürgen Städing - Vorsitzender des Aufsichtsrats: Stefan Schnabel - AG Nürnberg HRB 17689
On Thu, 3 May 2018, Adrian Bolster wrote: (...)
We?ve all had plenty of time to lab and eek out the incompatible devices. We?ve all had opportunity to dual stack. We?ve all got plenty of IPv6 space. What?s stopping us?
Adrian.
The fact we need everyone else to do the same! i.e. around 61K ASes and more importantly, all the networks that are part of them... :/ ASes in the v6 world are around 15K (imho, the figure is not evolving as quickly as it should...) (Source: CIDR Report) But this is not enough to quit. We'll get there someday. Cheers, Carlos
Hi. It's good question what is better, for LIRs I think it's better not to have limits. Anycase it's a question of Address-Policy working group! Please go there. Juri. On 03.05.2018 09:44, Adrian Bolster wrote:
Hi Ray,
I am interested in how things can work better for the community as a whole. It would be preferential, in my opinion, to turn off IPv4 routing on the Internet on the day that the last remnants are expected to be exhausted. As controversial as that is, it will properly encourage migration.
We’ve all had plenty of time to lab and eek out the incompatible devices. We’ve all had opportunity to dual stack. We’ve all got plenty of IPv6 space. What’s stopping us?
Adrian.
Sent from my iPhone
On 3 May 2018, at 07:31, Jetten Raymond <raymond.jetten@elisa.fi> wrote:
Hi Sebastian, All
Even if you would have an archivist, the problem is that some people just don't read all that. Then there are a few folks that are only interested in how things would work better for themselves, not for the community.
Rgds,
Ray
For Internal Use Only
-----Original Message----- From: members-discuss [mailto:members-discuss-bounces@ripe.net] On Behalf Of Sebastian Wiesinger Sent: 2. toukokuuta 2018 15:47 To: members-discuss@ripe.net Subject: Re: [members-discuss] Multiple LIR account mergers
* Adrian Bolster <Adrian.Bolster@purebroadband.net> [2018-05-02 12:53]:
The current rules are a good middle ground, however, as a relatively new ISP we can only access one /22 per LIR. Newer entities, such as us, do not have legacy IPv4 space which immediately inhibits growth and competition in the ISP marketplace. Hi Adrian,
this was discussed in the address-policy working group many, maaaany times. Please read the list archive for all the arguments and counterarguments. There is simply no way to change the fact: We're OUT of IPv4.
Maybe an RIPE archivist wouldn't be such a bad idea after all.
Regards
Sebastian
-- Sebastian Wiesinger Principal Network Architect Network & Security (ONS)
noris network AG Thomas-Mann-Straße 16-20 90471 Nürnberg Deutschland
Tel +49 911 9352 1335 Fax +49 911 9352 100
sebastian.wiesinger@noris.de https://www.noris.de - Mehr Leistung als Standard
Vorstand: Ingo Kraupa (Vorsitzender), Joachim Astel, Jürgen Städing - Vorsitzender des Aufsichtsrats: Stefan Schnabel - AG Nürnberg HRB 17689
_______________________________________________ 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/raymond.jetten%40elis...
_______________________________________________ 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/adrian.bolster%40sure...
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/hostmaster%40ntx.ru
Speaking of the community, it has been dived to pre 2012 and post 2012. Some of old members are making a fortune by selling their unused IP addresses to post 2012 members. Maybe we need to be more specific when we talk about what is works better for the community :) Arash On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 4:30 PM, Jetten Raymond <raymond.jetten@elisa.fi> wrote:
Hi Sebastian, All
Even if you would have an archivist, the problem is that some people just don't read all that. Then there are a few folks that are only interested in how things would work better for themselves, not for the community.
Rgds,
Ray
For Internal Use Only
-----Original Message----- From: members-discuss [mailto:members-discuss-bounces@ripe.net] On Behalf Of Sebastian Wiesinger Sent: 2. toukokuuta 2018 15:47 To: members-discuss@ripe.net Subject: Re: [members-discuss] Multiple LIR account mergers
* Adrian Bolster <Adrian.Bolster@purebroadband.net> [2018-05-02 12:53]:
The current rules are a good middle ground, however, as a relatively new ISP we can only access one /22 per LIR. Newer entities, such as us, do not have legacy IPv4 space which immediately inhibits growth and competition in the ISP marketplace.
Hi Adrian,
this was discussed in the address-policy working group many, maaaany times. Please read the list archive for all the arguments and counterarguments. There is simply no way to change the fact: We're OUT of IPv4.
Maybe an RIPE archivist wouldn't be such a bad idea after all.
Regards
Sebastian
-- Sebastian Wiesinger Principal Network Architect Network & Security (ONS)
noris network AG Thomas-Mann-Straße 16-20 90471 Nürnberg Deutschland
Tel +49 911 9352 1335 Fax +49 911 9352 100
sebastian.wiesinger@noris.de https://www.noris.de - Mehr Leistung als Standard
Vorstand: Ingo Kraupa (Vorsitzender), Joachim Astel, Jürgen Städing - Vorsitzender des Aufsichtsrats: Stefan Schnabel - AG Nürnberg HRB 17689
_______________________________________________ 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/raymond.jetten%40elisa.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/arash.naderpour%40gmail.com
On Thu May 03, 2018 at 04:46:55PM +1000, Arash Naderpour wrote:
Speaking of the community, it has been dived to pre 2012 and post 2012. Some of old members are making a fortune by selling their unused IP addresses to post 2012 members. Maybe we need to be more specific when we talk about what is works better for the community :)
RIPE cannot, and will not, change that. Simon
A very good case in point Arash. We have acquired IPv4 by the secondary market and it's both expensive and risky dealing with a third party who is many hundreds of miles away from you. Sent from my iPhone On 3 May 2018, at 07:48, Arash Naderpour <arash.naderpour@gmail.com<mailto:arash.naderpour@gmail.com>> wrote: Speaking of the community, it has been dived to pre 2012 and post 2012. Some of old members are making a fortune by selling their unused IP addresses to post 2012 members. Maybe we need to be more specific when we talk about what is works better for the community :) Arash On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 4:30 PM, Jetten Raymond <raymond.jetten@elisa.fi<mailto:raymond.jetten@elisa.fi>> wrote: Hi Sebastian, All Even if you would have an archivist, the problem is that some people just don't read all that. Then there are a few folks that are only interested in how things would work better for themselves, not for the community. Rgds, Ray For Internal Use Only -----Original Message----- From: members-discuss [mailto:members-discuss-bounces@ripe.net<mailto:members-discuss-bounces@ripe.net>] On Behalf Of Sebastian Wiesinger Sent: 2. toukokuuta 2018 15:47 To: members-discuss@ripe.net<mailto:members-discuss@ripe.net> Subject: Re: [members-discuss] Multiple LIR account mergers * Adrian Bolster <Adrian.Bolster@purebroadband.net<mailto:Adrian.Bolster@purebroadband.net>> [2018-05-02 12:53]:
The current rules are a good middle ground, however, as a relatively new ISP we can only access one /22 per LIR. Newer entities, such as us, do not have legacy IPv4 space which immediately inhibits growth and competition in the ISP marketplace.
Hi Adrian, this was discussed in the address-policy working group many, maaaany times. Please read the list archive for all the arguments and counterarguments. There is simply no way to change the fact: We're OUT of IPv4. Maybe an RIPE archivist wouldn't be such a bad idea after all. Regards Sebastian -- Sebastian Wiesinger Principal Network Architect Network & Security (ONS) noris network AG Thomas-Mann-Stra?e 16-20 90471 N?rnberg Deutschland Tel +49 911 9352 1335 Fax +49 911 9352 100 sebastian.wiesinger@noris.de<mailto:sebastian.wiesinger@noris.de> https://www.noris.de - Mehr Leistung als Standard Vorstand: Ingo Kraupa (Vorsitzender), Joachim Astel, J?rgen St?ding - Vorsitzender des Aufsichtsrats: Stefan Schnabel - AG N?rnberg HRB 17689 _______________________________________________ members-discuss mailing list members-discuss@ripe.net<mailto:members-discuss@ripe.net> https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/members-discuss Unsubscribe: https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/options/members-discuss/raymond.jetten%40elis... _______________________________________________ members-discuss mailing list members-discuss@ripe.net<mailto:members-discuss@ripe.net> https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/members-discuss Unsubscribe: https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/options/members-discuss/arash.naderpour%40gma... _______________________________________________ members-discuss mailing list members-discuss@ripe.net<mailto:members-discuss@ripe.net> https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/members-discuss Unsubscribe: https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/options/members-discuss/adrian.bolster%40sure...
Very bad idea! Everybody knows why. Thats it. Regards, Markel Sent from my iPhone
On May 1, 2018, at 13:04, Thomas Gallo - Nice Blue srl <thomas@niceblue.it> wrote:
YES! Probably this would be possible...
...just setting the RIPE sign-up fee of 4600 EUR that includes the first two years of membership in a non refoundable way ( :
Thomas
Il 01/05/2018 10:45, Dmitry Vorozhtsov ha scritto:
I think it would be great!
Best regards, Dmitry Vorozhtsov.
2018-04-30 22:07 GMT+09:00 Aleksey Bulgakov <aleksbulgakov@gmail.com>:
Hello, all.
What do you think if the NCC allow to merge accounts of the same company without 24 months restriction?
I thing this question should be discussed on the RIPE meeting in Marseille.
----- Kind regards, Alexey
_______________________________________________ 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/dvorozhtsov%40gmail.c...
_______________________________________________ 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/thomas%40niceblue.it
-- -- Thomas Gallo @ Nice Blue s.r.l. Centro Direzionale Interporto Padova - Torre B Galleria Spagna, 35 - 35127 PADOVA (PD) Fixed phone: +39 (0)49 85 94 766 Fax line: +39 (0)49 82 51 032 <Untitled attachment 12069.txt>
May be I missed something, but please tell me why? The 24 month restriction for transfer networks is still applied... 02.05.18 01:14, Markel Stefo пише:
Very bad idea! Everybody knows why.
Thats it.
Regards, Markel
Sent from my iPhone
On May 1, 2018, at 13:04, Thomas Gallo - Nice Blue srl <thomas@niceblue.it <mailto:thomas@niceblue.it>> wrote:
YES! Probably this would be possible...
...just setting the RIPE sign-up fee of 4600 EUR that includes the first two years of membership in a non refoundable way ( :
Thomas
Il 01/05/2018 10:45, Dmitry Vorozhtsov ha scritto:
I think it would be great!
Best regards, Dmitry Vorozhtsov.
2018-04-30 22:07 GMT+09:00 Aleksey Bulgakov <aleksbulgakov@gmail.com <mailto:aleksbulgakov@gmail.com>>:
Hello, all.
What do you think if the NCC allow to merge accounts of the same company without 24 months restriction?
I thing this question should be discussed on the RIPE meeting in Marseille.
----- Kind regards, Alexey
_______________________________________________ members-discuss mailing list members-discuss@ripe.net <mailto:members-discuss@ripe.net> https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/members-discuss <https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/members-discuss> Unsubscribe: https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/options/members-discuss/dvorozhtsov%40gmail.c... <https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/options/members-discuss/dvorozhtsov%40gmail.com>
_______________________________________________ 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/thomas%40niceblue.it
-- -- Thomas Gallo @ Nice Blue s.r.l. Centro Direzionale Interporto Padova - Torre B Galleria Spagna, 35 - 35127 PADOVA (PD) Fixed phone: +39 (0)49 85 94 766 Fax line: +39 (0)49 82 51 032 <Untitled attachment 12069.txt>
_______________________________________________ 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/maxtul%40netassist.ua
Hello, Personally, no, even if we are in the same situation for example. It would create a small “door” which would allow abuse of creating lots and lots of accounts. There are already LIR’s that already have 60+ accounts. Your proposition would help create an even larger gap between not so wealthy and wealthy LIRs, as the wealthier ones would acquire resources much faster than the other category would. Thanks, Petru — Petru Bunea / CEO suport@bunea.eu <mailto:suport@bunea.eu> / +40752481282 <tel:+40752481282> Bunea TELECOM / DATACENTER / APP DEVELOPMENT http://www.bunea.eu <http://www.bunea.eu/> / +40745495495 <tel:+40745495495>
On 30 Apr 2018, at 16:07, Aleksey Bulgakov <aleksbulgakov@gmail.com> wrote:
Hello, all.
What do you think if the NCC allow to merge accounts of the same company without 24 months restriction?
I thing this question should be discussed on the RIPE meeting in Marseille.
----- Kind regards, Alexey _______________________________________________ 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
Aleksey Bulgakov wrote:
What do you think if the NCC allow to merge accounts of the same company without 24 months restriction?
I thing this question should be discussed on the RIPE meeting in Marseille.
the NCC implements the 24 month restriction because the RIPE Community has requested this in the "RIPE Resource Transfer Policies" document (ripe-682).
2.2 Transfer Restrictions
Scarce resources, which are understood as those resources that are allocated or assigned by the RIPE NCC on a restricted basis (such as IPv4 or 16-bit ASNs), cannot be transferred for 24 months from the date the resource was received by the resource holder. This restriction also applies if the resource was received due to a change in the organisation's business (such as a merger or acquisition).
This restriction does not prevent the resources from being transferred due to further mergers or acquisitions within the 24-month period.
If you want to put forward a suggestion to change this policy, then the place to start is the Address Policy Working Group. Nick
Hi, I think that this question should be discussed - when there will be no more IPv4 left in RIPE. Until then it should not. It is a partial protection against bad actors, whom are trying to cheat the system. In my personal opinion, the restriction should be either even longer (5 to 10 years) or the LIR should not be allowed to transfer to its account any "last / 8" range if it already has one. This should include merge, in such case it should transfer LIR under its organization. However such discussion is quite pointless because no IPv4 policy, in any direction, has any chance to pass trough APWG. Sincerely Martin Dne pondělí 30. dubna 2018 15:07:20 CEST, Aleksey Bulgakov napsal(a):
Hello, all.
What do you think if the NCC allow to merge accounts of the same company without 24 months restriction?
I thing this question should be discussed on the RIPE meeting in Marseille.
----- Kind regards, Alexey
On Mon, Apr 30, 2018, at 15:07, Aleksey Bulgakov wrote:
Hello, all.
What do you think if the NCC allow to merge accounts of the same company without 24 months restriction?> I thing this question should be discussed on the RIPE meeting in *Marseille.* That may be an interesting discussion for RIPE 85 or RIPE 86 (2022- 2023), 2 years after the v4 pool has run out for good. -- Radu-Adrian FEURDEAN
participants (23)
-
Adrian Bolster -
Aleksey Bulgakov -
Arash Naderpour -
Bunea TELECOM -
Carlos Friaças -
Craig Arnold -
Daniel Pearson -
Daniel Ponticello -
Daniel Suchy -
David Benwell -
Dmitry Vorozhtsov -
Gert Doering -
Hostmaster -
Jetten Raymond -
Markel Stefo -
Martin Huněk -
Max Tulyev -
Nick Hilliard -
Radu-Adrian Feurdean -
Sebastian Wiesinger -
Simon Lockhart -
Thomas Gallo - Nice Blue srl -
William