[address-policy-wg] [Ticket#2014072901004581] 2014-02 New Draft Document and Impact Analysis Published (Allow IPv4 PI transfer [...]

Hi,

On Mon, Aug 04, 2014 at 11:04:37AM +0200, Andrei Kushnireuski wrote:
> Everybody knows a lot of ISPs use PI at result of non-ideal IPv4 assignment policy from the RIPE NCC side.

I should point out that the policy is not made by the RIPE NCC but by
*this* community.  The "PI loophole for IPv4 ISPs" was pointed out a few
times by people from the NCC, and the community did not want to change 
it - so don't blaim the NCC for it.

> The single solution is to make PI cost = PA cost and allow ISP to move PI > PA without additional problems.

Cost is out of scope for the address policy WG.

PI -> PA conversion can be done today already, if a PI holder is or becomes
a LIR - but that's a different thing than what is under discussion of this
proposal.  So it would be good to stay focused, and not discuss everything
that has gone wrong with IPv4 in this thread.

thanks,

Gert Doering
        -- APWG chair
-- 
have you enabled IPv6 on something today...?

SpaceNet AG                        Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard
Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14          Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann
D-80807 Muenchen                   HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen)
Tel: +49 (0)89/32356-444           USt-IdNr.: DE813185279
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 811 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: </ripe/mail/archives/address-policy-wg/attachments/20140804/e69dbd2d/attachment.sig>