[address-policy-wg] 2015-01 Draft Document and Impact Analysis Published (Alignment of Transfer Requirements for IPv4 Allocations)

On 09.06.2015 19:54, Ciprian Nica wrote:>
> Come up with a proposal that will really stop this kind of activity and
> I'll fully support it.

The only proposal which would actually fully stop this is actually
refusing Prefix-Transfers completely and enforce returning to the RIPE-Pool.

The only chance for taking-over Resources then should be a real "merge"
of two LIR including the demand of their individual customers justifying
why it is important to not being renumbered ... That kind of proposal
would actually remove a lot of "profit-making" for brokers etc. on one
hand, but on the other hand it offers the opportunity to the ones really
needing IPv4-Space to get their need fullfilled by RIPE... at least if
that kind of proposal would also enforce withdrawing IP-space which is
not being really used for a while.

Actually if that'd be done world-wide with all address-space not
publicly routed - and therefore easily to replace with 10.0.0.0/8 - we'd
have sufficient IPv4 for the next decades ... Just a brief look into the
routing-table on my router and I see 10 complete /8 (so called public
IP-Space-prefixes) which are completely not announced and another 4 /8
with less then one /21 announced.... and I do not want to know how many
of the large /8 to /14 announcements are actually routed into a
blackholes, as there are no real users on large parts of those nets.

... and we discuss about /22 nets being "hoarded"?

Sorry, could not resist to point on that.

Still I support the proposal because it reduces the win for abusers and
raises the risk that the now "hoarded" addresses are less worth when
they are sellable. Hey, it is on us to make IPv4-Prefixes worthless.

Best regards

-- 
Jens Ott

Opteamax GmbH

Simrockstr. 4b
53619 Rheinbreitbach

Tel.:  +49 2224 969500
Fax:   +49 2224 97691059
Email: jo at opteamax.de

HRB: 23144, Amtsgericht Montabaur
Umsatzsteuer-ID.: DE264133989