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] 2012-04 New Draft Document Published (PI Assignments from the last /8)
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2012-04 New Draft Document Published (PI Assignments from the last /8)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2012-04 New Draft Document Published (PI Assignments from the last /8)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Tore Anderson
tore.anderson at redpill-linpro.com
Wed Sep 12 09:19:02 CEST 2012
* Tore Anderson > (Just to be clear: I am not stating neither support or opposition to the > proposal.) I've slept on it, and I support this proposal. Allowing End Users access to the last /8 is, in my opinion, "The Right Thing To Do". While I think the low cost of PI space compared to PA space is going to cause a high risk for abuse/circumvention of the "one piece each" restriction, this is ultimately something that needs to be solved outside of address policy. If a new version of the proposal is going to be spun, I have the following suggestions for modifications: 1) The proposal should «voice an opinion», as Gert put it, that the fees for obtaining a PI prefix from the last /8 should be comparable to obtaining a PA one through becoming a LIR. I hope that this would make it less likely that the "one piece each" restriction would be abused/circumvented - at least, not more likely than the current restriction being circumvented through multiple LIRs. 2) The /24 limit for assignments should be raised to /22. While the current proposal does reduce discrimination of End Users compared to LIRs, it does not remove it completely. I believe that "Doing The Right Thing" would be to make access to the last /8 completely equal, instead of continuing to give preferential treatment to LIRs. As I've pointed out earlier, both of those amendments would make the RIPE last /8 policy (and pricing) more aligned with APNIC's, which appears to work fine for them. They've used 8.7% of their last /8 over the 17 months it's been since they ran out. As I understand it, in their last /8 policy, assignments and allocations are both capped at /22. Regardless of it being an assignment or an allocation, it costs the same - and significantly more than the RIPE €50: http://www.apnic.net/services/become-a-member/how-much-does-it-cost http://submit.apnic.net/cgi-bin/feecalc.pl?ipv4=%2F22&ipv6=&action=Calculate Best regards, -- Tore Anderson Redpill Linpro AS - http://www.redpill-linpro.com
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2012-04 New Draft Document Published (PI Assignments from the last /8)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2012-04 New Draft Document Published (PI Assignments from the last /8)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]