Re: [ncc-services-wg] IP adress transferring in Ukraine
Sergey,
On 27 Oct 2022, at 18:13, Sergey Myasoedov via ncc-services-wg <ncc-services-wg@ripe.net> wrote:
Viktoriia,
We have to re-build telecom and internet infrastructure, and yes, we could bring new equipment there, but if the IP addresses of local Internet Providers will be transferred to other parties, we will not be able to restore even our critical infrastructure there, and there is no place to get new IPv4 addresses.
You don't need IPv4 addresses for rebuilding IT infrastructure. There are lot of equipment supplied with Keep Ukraine Connected project, the equipment list is public and I'm pretty sure all of this equipment support IPv6.
If that would be possible, we would not have this discussion at all, and the transfer of resources would not exist as such. Everybody would just get a fresh block of IPv6 addresses and we would forget about IPv4. And I'm pretty sure you know that, so let's not diverge the discussion. Cheers, Petryk Pyatochkin
-- Kind regards, Sergey Myasoedov
On 27. 10. 2022, at 17:44, Viktoriia Opanasiuk <viktoriia.opanasiuk@gmail.com> wrote:
Dear Mattias,
responding on «As this only affects LIRs, I doubt there will be significant participation by non-LIRs» I must say that it affects all internet service providers that use IP resources. In Ukraine there are more than 5 000 registered ISPs, but not all of them are LIRs.
The situation that we have now is that when russian troops withdraw from our territory, they dismantle and take with them not only washing machines, but also telecom equipment, TV- and radio-transmitters, leaving people who live there without any information channels and means of communication. We have to re-build telecom and internet infrastructure, and yes, we could bring new equipment there, but if the IP addresses of local Internet Providers will be transferred to other parties, we will not be able to restore even our critical infrastructure there, and there is no place to get new IPv4 addresses.
Therefore any solutions that involve allowing transfers now and somehow reverting them later are not solving this immediate problem that we have.
Viktoriia Opanasiuk
чт, 27 окт. 2022 г. в 16:59, Matthias Merkel <matthias.merkel@staclar.com>: Hi Viktoriia,
RIPE operates on consensus policies. A new policy cannot be adopted if there is a meaningful number of objections like clearly there is here.
As has been explained in the in-person meetings, a freeze cannot be implemented until a corresponding policy is in place, as this may otherwise open up the RIPE NCC to civil liability. Of course, there is also a risk that a freeze could negatively impact Ukrainian LIRs (for example ones who may want to sell parts of their IP space to fund continued operations).
For the reasons above, I personally don’t think that a blanket ban will be a good solution. Instead, the RIPE NCC should conduct increased due diligence on transfers from Ukraine and other high-risk regions. From what I understand, the NCC has already implemented these measures.
Most of the recent emails have already identified themselves as Ukrainian, some including a reg-id or at least mentioning they were an LIR as well. As this only affects LIRs, I doubt there will be significant participation by non-LIRs.
Matthias Merkel
Staclar, Inc.
From: ncc-services-wg <ncc-services-wg-bounces@ripe.net> on behalf of Viktoriia Opanasiuk <viktoriia.opanasiuk@gmail.com> Date: Thursday, 27. October 2022 at 15:51 To: ncc-services-wg@ripe.net <ncc-services-wg@ripe.net> Subject: [ncc-services-wg] IP adress transferring in Ukraine
Hi everyone!
Looking at such a broad discussion around the issue of the decision to protect Ukrainian IP resources, I want to add a comment and a wish.
First of all, I would like to clarify the issue a little. We are only talking about temporarily freezing the transfer of IP addresses until a solution to correctly identify and prohibit risky transfers is found and implemented.
And in order to understand who exactly is against the temporary freeze or who supports it , it would be very good if you wrote a few words about who exactly those who express their position represent. For example, does the company have LIR status, is the company an ISP provider, and if so, in which regions of Ukraine does it provide services. If the LIR is not a ISP provider, does it continue its work in Ukraine? This is purely to understand whether the position of the participant in the discussion is from a representative of the Ukrainian community and what part of this community he represents.
Otherwise, this discussion may slightly distort the real problems that exist in Ukraine today.
--
Viktoriia Opanasiuk
-- З повагою, Вікторія Опанасюк --
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, get a password reminder, or change your subscription options, please visit: https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/ncc-services-wg
--
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, get a password reminder, or change your subscription options, please visit: https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/ncc-services-wg
Petryk,
If that would be possible, we would not have this discussion at all, and the transfer of resources would not exist as such. Everybody would just get a fresh block of IPv6 addresses and we would forget about IPv4.
I disagree. If you're rebuilding your network, you may build it with the new principles and technologies available at the moment. It's a bit silly to rebuild the network with the fresh hardware using the principles you've used 10 or 15 years ago. And there are networks in the world built on IPv6 and using IPv4 as an additional service. So the consumption of IPv4 will be less. So I encourage the engineers to keep this in mind. -- Kind regards, Sergey Myasoedov
On 27. 10. 2022, at 19:29, Petryk Pyatochkin via ncc-services-wg <ncc-services-wg@ripe.net> wrote:
Sergey,
On 27 Oct 2022, at 18:13, Sergey Myasoedov via ncc-services-wg <ncc-services-wg@ripe.net> wrote:
Viktoriia,
We have to re-build telecom and internet infrastructure, and yes, we could bring new equipment there, but if the IP addresses of local Internet Providers will be transferred to other parties, we will not be able to restore even our critical infrastructure there, and there is no place to get new IPv4 addresses.
You don't need IPv4 addresses for rebuilding IT infrastructure. There are lot of equipment supplied with Keep Ukraine Connected project, the equipment list is public and I'm pretty sure all of this equipment support IPv6.
If that would be possible, we would not have this discussion at all, and the transfer of resources would not exist as such. Everybody would just get a fresh block of IPv6 addresses and we would forget about IPv4.
And I'm pretty sure you know that, so let's not diverge the discussion.
Cheers, Petryk Pyatochkin
-- Kind regards, Sergey Myasoedov
On 27. 10. 2022, at 17:44, Viktoriia Opanasiuk <viktoriia.opanasiuk@gmail.com> wrote:
Dear Mattias,
responding on «As this only affects LIRs, I doubt there will be significant participation by non-LIRs» I must say that it affects all internet service providers that use IP resources. In Ukraine there are more than 5 000 registered ISPs, but not all of them are LIRs.
The situation that we have now is that when russian troops withdraw from our territory, they dismantle and take with them not only washing machines, but also telecom equipment, TV- and radio-transmitters, leaving people who live there without any information channels and means of communication. We have to re-build telecom and internet infrastructure, and yes, we could bring new equipment there, but if the IP addresses of local Internet Providers will be transferred to other parties, we will not be able to restore even our critical infrastructure there, and there is no place to get new IPv4 addresses.
Therefore any solutions that involve allowing transfers now and somehow reverting them later are not solving this immediate problem that we have.
Viktoriia Opanasiuk
чт, 27 окт. 2022 г. в 16:59, Matthias Merkel <matthias.merkel@staclar.com>: Hi Viktoriia,
RIPE operates on consensus policies. A new policy cannot be adopted if there is a meaningful number of objections like clearly there is here.
As has been explained in the in-person meetings, a freeze cannot be implemented until a corresponding policy is in place, as this may otherwise open up the RIPE NCC to civil liability. Of course, there is also a risk that a freeze could negatively impact Ukrainian LIRs (for example ones who may want to sell parts of their IP space to fund continued operations).
For the reasons above, I personally don’t think that a blanket ban will be a good solution. Instead, the RIPE NCC should conduct increased due diligence on transfers from Ukraine and other high-risk regions. From what I understand, the NCC has already implemented these measures.
Most of the recent emails have already identified themselves as Ukrainian, some including a reg-id or at least mentioning they were an LIR as well. As this only affects LIRs, I doubt there will be significant participation by non-LIRs.
Matthias Merkel
Staclar, Inc.
From: ncc-services-wg <ncc-services-wg-bounces@ripe.net> on behalf of Viktoriia Opanasiuk <viktoriia.opanasiuk@gmail.com> Date: Thursday, 27. October 2022 at 15:51 To: ncc-services-wg@ripe.net <ncc-services-wg@ripe.net> Subject: [ncc-services-wg] IP adress transferring in Ukraine
Hi everyone!
Looking at such a broad discussion around the issue of the decision to protect Ukrainian IP resources, I want to add a comment and a wish.
First of all, I would like to clarify the issue a little. We are only talking about temporarily freezing the transfer of IP addresses until a solution to correctly identify and prohibit risky transfers is found and implemented.
And in order to understand who exactly is against the temporary freeze or who supports it , it would be very good if you wrote a few words about who exactly those who express their position represent. For example, does the company have LIR status, is the company an ISP provider, and if so, in which regions of Ukraine does it provide services. If the LIR is not a ISP provider, does it continue its work in Ukraine? This is purely to understand whether the position of the participant in the discussion is from a representative of the Ukrainian community and what part of this community he represents.
Otherwise, this discussion may slightly distort the real problems that exist in Ukraine today.
--
Viktoriia Opanasiuk
-- З повагою, Вікторія Опанасюк --
Dear Petryk,
On 27 Oct 2022, at 20:29, Petryk Pyatochkin via ncc-services-wg <ncc-services-wg@ripe.net> wrote:
Sergey,
On 27 Oct 2022, at 18:13, Sergey Myasoedov via ncc-services-wg <ncc-services-wg@ripe.net> wrote:
Viktoriia,
We have to re-build telecom and internet infrastructure, and yes, we could bring new equipment there, but if the IP addresses of local Internet Providers will be transferred to other parties, we will not be able to restore even our critical infrastructure there, and there is no place to get new IPv4 addresses.
You don't need IPv4 addresses for rebuilding IT infrastructure. There are lot of equipment supplied with Keep Ukraine Connected project, the equipment list is public and I'm pretty sure all of this equipment support IPv6.
If that would be possible, we would not have this discussion at all, and the transfer of resources would not exist as such. Everybody would just get a fresh block of IPv6 addresses and we would forget about IPv4.
And I'm pretty sure you know that, so let's not diverge the discussion.
As far as I understand you mean that IPv6 implementation not depend on operators equipment, but depend on end users CPE?
Cheers, Petryk Pyatochkin
-- Kind regards, Sergey Myasoedov
On 27. 10. 2022, at 17:44, Viktoriia Opanasiuk <viktoriia.opanasiuk@gmail.com> wrote:
Dear Mattias,
responding on «As this only affects LIRs, I doubt there will be significant participation by non-LIRs» I must say that it affects all internet service providers that use IP resources. In Ukraine there are more than 5 000 registered ISPs, but not all of them are LIRs.
The situation that we have now is that when russian troops withdraw from our territory, they dismantle and take with them not only washing machines, but also telecom equipment, TV- and radio-transmitters, leaving people who live there without any information channels and means of communication. We have to re-build telecom and internet infrastructure, and yes, we could bring new equipment there, but if the IP addresses of local Internet Providers will be transferred to other parties, we will not be able to restore even our critical infrastructure there, and there is no place to get new IPv4 addresses.
Therefore any solutions that involve allowing transfers now and somehow reverting them later are not solving this immediate problem that we have.
Viktoriia Opanasiuk
чт, 27 окт. 2022 г. в 16:59, Matthias Merkel <matthias.merkel@staclar.com>: Hi Viktoriia,
RIPE operates on consensus policies. A new policy cannot be adopted if there is a meaningful number of objections like clearly there is here.
As has been explained in the in-person meetings, a freeze cannot be implemented until a corresponding policy is in place, as this may otherwise open up the RIPE NCC to civil liability. Of course, there is also a risk that a freeze could negatively impact Ukrainian LIRs (for example ones who may want to sell parts of their IP space to fund continued operations).
For the reasons above, I personally don’t think that a blanket ban will be a good solution. Instead, the RIPE NCC should conduct increased due diligence on transfers from Ukraine and other high-risk regions. From what I understand, the NCC has already implemented these measures.
Most of the recent emails have already identified themselves as Ukrainian, some including a reg-id or at least mentioning they were an LIR as well. As this only affects LIRs, I doubt there will be significant participation by non-LIRs.
Matthias Merkel
Staclar, Inc.
From: ncc-services-wg <ncc-services-wg-bounces@ripe.net> on behalf of Viktoriia Opanasiuk <viktoriia.opanasiuk@gmail.com> Date: Thursday, 27. October 2022 at 15:51 To: ncc-services-wg@ripe.net <ncc-services-wg@ripe.net> Subject: [ncc-services-wg] IP adress transferring in Ukraine
Hi everyone!
Looking at such a broad discussion around the issue of the decision to protect Ukrainian IP resources, I want to add a comment and a wish.
First of all, I would like to clarify the issue a little. We are only talking about temporarily freezing the transfer of IP addresses until a solution to correctly identify and prohibit risky transfers is found and implemented.
And in order to understand who exactly is against the temporary freeze or who supports it , it would be very good if you wrote a few words about who exactly those who express their position represent. For example, does the company have LIR status, is the company an ISP provider, and if so, in which regions of Ukraine does it provide services. If the LIR is not a ISP provider, does it continue its work in Ukraine? This is purely to understand whether the position of the participant in the discussion is from a representative of the Ukrainian community and what part of this community he represents.
Otherwise, this discussion may slightly distort the real problems that exist in Ukraine today.
--
Viktoriia Opanasiuk
-- З повагою, Вікторія Опанасюк --
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, get a password reminder, or change your subscription options, please visit: https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/ncc-services-wg
--
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, get a password reminder, or change your subscription options, please visit: https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/ncc-services-wg
--
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, get a password reminder, or change your subscription options, please visit: https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/ncc-services-wg
— Serg Galat
Peace, On Fri, 28 Oct 2022, 12:45 am Serg Galat, <greysticky@gmail.com> wrote:
You don't need IPv4 addresses for rebuilding IT infrastructure. There are lot of equipment supplied with Keep Ukraine Connected project, the equipment list is public and I'm pretty sure all of this equipment support IPv6.
If that would be possible, we would not have this discussion at all, and the transfer of resources would not exist as such. Everybody would just get a fresh block of IPv6 addresses and we would forget about IPv4.
And I'm pretty sure you know that, so let's not diverge the discussion.
As far as I understand you mean that IPv6 implementation not depend on operators equipment, but depend on end users CPE?
Not sure if I understand where this conversation is headed, but anyhow: IPv6 deployment, as of now (as well as long ago, like 2-3 years already), is entirely dependant on the network middleware, which is switches, firewalls, and whatever middleboxes (and their configuration, which sometimes gets inherited from the previous generation of devices). Endpoints are not an issue. These are, mostly, new. Out of the rest of these (already a minority), most of them are software-updated. I know an ISP who switched one day to IPv6 only and only got a thousand support requests for what should be believed to be a hundred thousand customers database. And they just resolved all of that in a week. -- Töma
participants (4)
-
Petryk Pyatochkin -
Serg Galat -
Sergey Myasoedov -
Töma Gavrichenkov