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] 2015-01 New Policy Proposal (Alignment ofTransfer Requirements for IPv4 Allocations)
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2015-01 New Policy Proposal (Alignment ofTransfer Requirements for IPv4 Allocations)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2015-01 New Policy Proposal (Alignment ofTransfer Requirements for IPv4 Allocations)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Nick Hilliard
nick at inex.ie
Wed Mar 18 16:46:17 CET 2015
> I think that the more we talk about it, the more this loophole will be > (ab)used. The part that was just theoretical was estimating how long it > will take a company to decide that instead of going to the market, they > could actually go to the RIPE NCC and get a /16 or maybe a /12 at €2.3 - > €3.4 per IP (depending in which quarter you decide to do it). from what I understand, the procedures clarified in RIPE-640 mean that the price of a /22 obtained by LIR churn will remain at startup fee + 1Y membership, and that it doesn't make any difference to the overall cost whether this is done in Q1 or Q4 because when you open a LIR, you are liable for a full year's membership fees. I.e. cost of doing this in 2015 is 1600+2000 = 3600, or €3.51 per ip address. Nick
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2015-01 New Policy Proposal (Alignment ofTransfer Requirements for IPv4 Allocations)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2015-01 New Policy Proposal (Alignment ofTransfer Requirements for IPv4 Allocations)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]