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] Assignment transfer among LIR
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] FYI: ICANN News Alert -- Ratification of Global Policy Proposal for Post Exhaustion IPv4 Allocation Mechanisms by the IANA
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Assignment transfer among LIR
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Pascal Gloor
pascal.gloor at finecom.ch
Tue May 22 15:15:47 CEST 2012
Dear WG, As a service provider specialized in CATV, we will soon face a competition problem. CATV operators, often, do not operate their IP business, they take these services from a specialized service provider (like us) and therefore the end-users get IP(v4) addresses from that provider. In the future, CATV operators will not be able to change their provider because the new provider will be unable to assign IPv4 space to them. On the other side, there is no need for additional IPs, the CATV operator already has them (from another LIR). If we do not solve this issue, this market will simply and completely freeze, giving way too much power to the 'current' provider (like us) over the CATV operator. I've been thinking a lot about how to solve this issue, so I'll just throw a first pseudo-draft, give me your feedback and we'll make it better. Post-IPv4-Exhaustion customer transfer When a customer changes from LIR A to LIR B: - RIPE NCC will allocate the needed space (out of the 'reserved-for-new-LIR' space) to LIB B, but not larger than the original one. - RIPE NCC will inform LIR A about the transfer and will request the space to be returned. - If LIR A cannot return the space (deaggregation?), RIPE NCC will freeze (how?) it. NOTE: There should maybe be a minimal assignment size for this process, maybe /22. (Why? To avoid a flood of very small assignments transfer requests to RIPE NCC). Let me know what you think, how it can be improved or if you think its BS. Cheers, Pascal
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] FYI: ICANN News Alert -- Ratification of Global Policy Proposal for Post Exhaustion IPv4 Allocation Mechanisms by the IANA
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Assignment transfer among LIR
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]