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

On Sun, May 22, 2016 at 10:25 AM, Riccardo Gori <rgori at wirem.net> wrote:

> Hi Roger,
>
> thank you for your questions. I try to answer below
>
> Il 21/05/2016 09:45, Roger Jørgensen ha scritto:
>
> <snip>
>
> Be specific, is it for having more address for the end-users? Datacenter?
> Services? Infrastructure? IPv6-to-IPv4 services? CGN? Proxyes?
>
>
>
> It's happening: end customers of new operators (read as new LIRs) are
> requesting new services such as datacenters or multihoming and IPv6
> deployment in the meanwhile.
> Those are the tipical request that I reiceve. For example to multihome and
> bgp a customer I need a /24
> What if I have no address space to provide?  I can ask my customer to sign
> up and he will get a /22 automatically wasting a 3 x /24
> I think in many cases this is why we are registering such new sign up
> growth trends.
> I already said in past emails that when I started our business of fiber
> optic provider the carrier said to us "ask us for transport and access but
> not for addresses. sign up and get yours"
> This is reflecting in all the chain from top to bottom. This could be a
> point where to act. If we turn the request re-introducing justification and
> we turn minimum request to a /24
> we can address this kind of problem while slowing down LIRs sign up rate
> to obtain a /23 or /24 to address this kind of requests
>
>
> hope this help in understand small player needings
>
>
You have given me no real reason, just nice to have. We passed nice to have
some years ago.

End users cannot continue to get a /24, there are not enough address space
for that, sorry but that's life. Sure some operators have enough and that's
unfair for others. Only way for them to get something like that is to
either become LIR, or use IPv6. Why is it so hard to understand that?


So I ask _again_, where is the IPv4 need? What type of usage is it ment
for? We've passed the "it's nice to have" some years ago, now we're down to
, do you _really_ need 10 addresses? Can you survive with 2 and deploy IPv6?



-- 

Roger Jorgensen           | ROJO9-RIPE
rogerj at gmail.com          | - IPv6 is The Key!
http://www.jorgensen.no   | roger at jorgensen.no
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: </ripe/mail/archives/address-policy-wg/attachments/20160523/d92f3465/attachment.html>