[address-policy-wg] 2015-05 Discussion Period extended until 13 May 2016 (Last /8 Allocation Criteria Revision)

i'll try to see in the future...
Small LIR will register on different company (or daughter) LIR just to 
take a "only one /22"
many other companies will becoma a LIR just to take v4 IPs.
It's cheaper than >10 EUR/ip, right (this is already happening).
Imagine after some period of time how much voting power they will have !
Well, this proposal may be accepted or may not, but in several years... 
think about it,
will there be a v4 space for a new entrance hmmm

Following is to those who will vote "against"
Don't think only for the upcoming LIRs, try to understand current ones 
with "only one /22"
...and don't run away with "membership is for voting, not for space 
allocation"
because with your vote you'll decide allocation

p.s.
why unused space can be owned by non-working companies?
and this space comes on market like "never announced space" - who need 
of such space


Cheers,
Momchil


On 17.4.2016 г. 11:42 ч., Lu Heng wrote:
> Hi
>
> I think an more interesting break down would be the companies' 
> business(e.g the industry they are in)
>
> As I understand, more and more end user are becoming LIR as their ISP 
> refuse to give them IP, therefore it fundamentally changed the 
> very definition of LIR.
>
> The outbreak in the member mailing list last time reminds us how big 
> that group could be.
>
> What current ISP doing nowadays, instead of charging customer and 
> apply to RIPE for their customer's IP, they ask their customer come to 
> RIPE to become their own LIR and get their own IP then manage it for 
> the customer. In which, results what we see today, shipping companies, 
> banks, even airlines become LIR.
>
>
> On Sunday 17 April 2016, Gert Doering <gert at space.net 
> <mailto:gert at space.net>> wrote:
>
>     Hi,
>
>     On Sun, Apr 17, 2016 at 09:52:15AM +0300, Adrian Pitulac wrote:
>     > I see the same explanation again and again and again. But I see
>     no real
>     > argument from you guys. No statistics, no trending, no
>     prediction, just
>     > "keep the ipv4 last longer". Can you do better than that?
>
>     Marco has provided statistics about the IPv4 pool runout, broken
>     down by
>     "185" and "other addresses returned".  These show that while the total
>     number of addresses in the NCC stock is sort of "keeping up",
>     about half
>     of 185 is used up - so with the current trend going on, 185 will be
>     used up in 2018-2019 or so
>
>     https://labs.ripe.net/Members/marco_schmidt/taking-a-closer-look-at-the-last-slash-8
>
>     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
>
>
>
> -- 
> --
> Kind regards.
> Lu
>
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: </ripe/mail/archives/address-policy-wg/attachments/20160417/375fa4d1/attachment.html>