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

+1 to this policy.

Arash Naderpour


On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 6:19 AM, Radu-Adrian FEURDEAN <
ripe-wgs at radu-adrian.feurdean.net> wrote:

> On Sun, Apr 17, 2016, at 10:42, Lu Heng wrote:
> > 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.
>
> Hi,
>
> This is exactly the point where the community failed. We keep saying
> that there is no more IPv4, and in the meanwhile more and more companies
> (non-ISP) discover that they can still get their needed IPv4 space, with
> the bonus of becoming provider independent. In the process of doing
> this, they "eat up" a /22 even if they only need a /23 or a /24 (or
> less, but that can't be routed).
>
> At the same time they still hear (for more than 10 years already) that
> IPv6 is coming, but still don't see it "coming close enough" (no, they
> don't really care about Google, FB, and Netflix - and if they do, it's
> more about how to block them).
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: </ripe/mail/archives/address-policy-wg/attachments/20160418/d147c3b1/attachment.html>