This archive is retained to ensure existing URLs remain functional. It will not contain any emails sent to this mailing list after July 1, 2024. For all messages, including those sent before and after this date, please visit the new location of the archive at https://mailman.ripe.net/archives/list/address-policy-wg@ripe.net/
[address-policy-wg] 2006-05 New Policy Proposal (PI Assignment Size)
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2006-05 New Policy Proposal (PI Assignment Size)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2006-05 New Policy Proposal (PI Assignment Size)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Gert Doering
gert at space.net
Mon Sep 18 17:58:22 CEST 2006
Hi, On Tue, Aug 29, 2006 at 12:43:22PM +0200, Garry Glendown wrote: > What's the point in making end users (as in Companies, etc.) register as > an LIR just because they want (or need) a network of their own? Discouragement. There are some end users where "everyone agrees" that PI space is a "must", and then there are some where renumbering really would be quick and mostly painless. I strongly think that the latter kind should not be able to get PI space easily, for a one-time-fee, and burden the *recurring cost* for their convenience on everybody else. If we make PI cost a "reasonable" price (like "extra-small LIR") per year, this will not hinder networks that "must have" PI very much - and those that find PI a nice and cheap convenience might reconsider. [..] > If the amount of prefixes were a reason, shouldn't ISPs be (en)forced to > aggregate their announcements? If someone has a good idea how to tackle that, I'd like to hear about it. Really. (But this is only remotely relevant to the ongoing discussion) [..] > Rather, in order to discourage PI usage by endusers who don't actually > need a PI network from a technical standpoint, why not charge an > appropriate amount for assigning PI networks? That's the idea. > Please correct me if I got > this wrong, but at the moment, PI networks count towards the LIR's > rating. Which means "the LIR pays", which hopefully translates into "the PI holder pays". The problem with the current scheme is that it's a one-time fee, payable only in the year of PI assignment (!), and after that, the PI is free. > Which can end up - in a way - to be unfair, as PI networks are > requested for end customer, which may at some point in the future switch > providers. The points are still counted, even though the provider does > not have any revenue to count against it. No. The LIR is charged only in the year of PI assignment. Gert Doering -- NetMaster -- Total number of prefixes smaller than registry allocations: 94488 SpaceNet AG Mail: netmaster at Space.Net Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Tel : +49-89-32356-0 D- 80807 Muenchen Fax : +49-89-32356-234
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2006-05 New Policy Proposal (PI Assignment Size)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2006-05 New Policy Proposal (PI Assignment Size)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]