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/[email protected]/
[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 ]
Jeroen Massar
jeroen at unfix.org
Mon Sep 18 18:33:54 CEST 2006
Mike Hughes wrote: > --On 18 September 2006 17:58 +0200 Gert Doering <gert at space.net> wrote: > >> 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. > > This is important given that there *is* an ongoing cost of PI space (e.g. > operating the databases which say who's been allocated what), and this is > set to increase if anything, with the plans to digitally sign > allocations/assignments in order to increase the security of the routing > system (e.g. sBGP). > > I find myself more in favour of having to "lease" number resources, as long > as the cost is reasonable (and we can see to that because of the > "bottom-up" process that exists), rather than "buy" them. > > This will, if anything, help with resource reclamation and re-cycling in > the longer term. Leasing sounds good in my book too, especially with schemes like sBGP this will also become easier, as the certificate used for announcing the prefix will have an expiration date, the date of the renewal. Folks who didn't pay their fees automatically loose their ability to announce their prefix. As such sBGP (or a similar method) will introduce quite a new internet era: high security routes, unless an ISP gets compromised, and also the ability to make prefixes illegal very easily. With such a scheme an organization will lease a prefix for X amount of years, they can then in advance of the end date already opt for a refresh of the prefix. Of course, where possible the RIR should make it possible for the leaser to get the same prefix over and over, avoiding the needs to renumber. When the leaser doesn't extend the prefix lease on time the lease expires and the prefix is returned to the free pool. Greets, Jeroen (who indeed would like to see a scheme like sBGP deployed :) -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 311 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: </ripe/mail/archives/address-policy-wg/attachments/20060918/e94293e8/attachment.sig>
- 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 ]