[address-policy-wg] 2008-07 Discussion Period extended until 24 August 2009 (Ensuring efficient use of historical IPv4 resources)

On Wed, 29 Jul 2009, Philip Smith wrote:

> Hi Larisa,

Hi Philip,
>
> Larisa A. Yurkina said the following on 28/7/09 16:33 :
> >
> > I'm against the position about "documentation of all address resources
> > they hold,including pre-RIR registrations".
> > The "documentation" in pre-RIR times did not look like "forms for
> > gathering the required information", with "network infrastructure
> > and future plans" from ripe-471 (6.1.).
> > They only contained a template for db and that's all.
> > To fulfil the proposed policy, I have to turn to customers of pre-rir
> > /16s and ask them "all" to re-right their request forms to ripe-381.
> > Which is hardly possible.
>
> I don't see where the proposed policy says that customers who received
> pre-rir address space from you have to now fill in ripe-381 style forms.
> Can you point me to the text?
>
"When requesting an additional allocation, an LIR will be asked about the utilisation and documentation of all address resources they hold, not just those they have received from the RIPE NCC (this includes pre-RIR registrations)."

You include pre-rir registrations into procedure of getting additional allocation for LIR.
Ripe-471 says:
"Additional address space will only be allocated after the information supplied with the request has been verified and a new allocation deemed necessary."

What kind of information you must supply? Please see the standard hm questionnaire:

"For each netname listed which was assigned using your AW, please tell
us what the organisation does and how they are using the address
space. Please include numbers of customers and customer:IP ratio
where such services are being provided. For broadband services using
more than a /20 in total, please provide current utilisation
statistics. This will give us an overview of how the IP addresses are
distributed within the networks."
In fact, it is ripe-381 information.
Which is not a problem for your recent assignements documentation
you have to keep according policy. But it can cause problems
for some 15 years-old assignements. How you motivate old customers to
provide inform like that? Just because you need a new allocation?
All that can make getting additional allocation very problematic.

> What I'm proposing is that LIRs who hold pre-rir addresses simply
> document the utilisation of those addresses, and at what level. If your
> customer has received pre-RIR space from you, and they are announcing it
> all to you, then I'd say it is reasonable to assume that they are using
> it. If they are only announcing 50% of it, then it is reasonable to
> assume that only 50% is being used. The other 50% could be used by other
> customers of yours, or in your own infrastructure, etc.
>
> The policy proposal requests LIRs who have address space that is not
> used to indicate so when they apply for fresh space. In other words,
> request LIRs to use unused space first before applying for fresh space.
>
I'm completely agree, if address space is not used, it should be re-assigned
to those who use it. But, your proposal does not say a about
"document the utilisation of those addresses" in some other way than
the standard procedure of getting a new allocation.
If you propose some kind of utilisation rate documentation for pre-rir
please give more details.

> Does this address your concerns?
>
> philip
> --
>
>

Thank you.


With respect,
Larisa Yurkina
---
RIPN Registry center
-----