[address-policy-wg] 2016-03 New Version and Impact Analysis Published (Locking Down the Final /8 Policy)

On Fri, 21 Oct 2016, Elvis Daniel Velea wrote:

> a. the members that have received resources before 2012 + the members that 
> can afford to 'buy' IP addresses allocated until recently (-2y from the date 
> this policy proposal would be implemented)
> b. the members that have only received resources after September 2012 and can 
> not afford to buy IP IP addresses at the market prices (but they can buy an 
> unlimited number of these from the RIPE NCC at ~€4,5 (€3,4/1st year + 
> €1,4/2nd year - redistribution of profit)

Correct.

These post-2012 members would have ZERO IPv4 addresses from RIPE NCC if it 
wasn't for the Last /8 policy, we would have completely exhausted in 2012 
without this policy.

So they were only able to get addresses at all because these addresses 
were saved to be used under different policy, thus under restrictions.

I was one of the proponents of this. I have subsequently changed my mind 
and I am now of the opinion that we should not have any /8 policy at all, 
and just hand out the rest of the IPv4 space to current LIRs and let the 
market handle the rest. It's obvious from the discussions here that most 
people do not appreciate the intention behind the last-/8 policy, and our 
attempts to try to help new entrants into the market has failed.

So let's just get it over with and exhaust all the rest of RIPE NCC free 
addresses immediately by some scheme to divvy up whatever free resources 
are left to the members and after that, let all restrictions go.

If we're actually exhausted then some people might get on with deploying 
IPv6, I hear some people not deploying because they see that RIPE isn't 
completely exhausted yet.

-- 
Mikael Abrahamsson    email: swmike at swm.pp.se