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

Hi Yuri,

A bit of quick feedback:

> 1) RIPE has reserved space/free pool that it's also will be used under
> current polices for LIRs, there are a lot of space in it. And those
> space will be used for new LIRs. You can see that it will be enough for
> 10-15 years or more.

That number is too optimistic. During the APWG session at RIPE73 we just got analysis from both the RIPE NCC and Geoff Huston, and both independently have shown that the pool has an expected remaining lifetime of 4 to 4.5 years.

> 2) Policy name should be not like /8 but on all free/reserve space
> because it should relay on all rest. So name "/8" is not correct.

Yes, the working group is aware of that. The current policy is indeed about all the remaining IPv4 space in RIPE NCC (that is not reserved for other purposes). Policy proposals for cleaning up the policy language are welcome!

> [...]
> But we have in RIPE ~14Mlns IPs more as same as in 2013.

It might look like RIPE NCC is not allocating much IPv4 space, but that impression is skewed. That is caused by IPv4 space coming to RIPE NCC from IANA. The statistics on what to expect from IANA in the coming years show that this is not sustainable and we are actually going through the remaining pool than the number appear to suggest.

> 4) This policy will make some other type of IPs, we make things more
> complex, but we should make things/rules/databases less complex. We
> don't need new one color of IP.

Well, the proposal did just get abandoned, so this implementation detail is definitely no longer relevant.

> 5) In case of such proposal ISPs will move to IPv6 more slowly. So RIPE
> push to everybody to go IPv6 and from other size they don't allow that
> to happen. Everybody understand that at America they just gave out all
> IPv4 and America is the most IPv6 country. So less limitations - more
> progress! So what do you select?

I'm not sure we can apply market economics as seen in the ARIN region directly to predict what would happen in the RIPE region...

> 6) As far as RIPE control limitations - RIPE control the market. And
> this is not correct.

Yes, the RIPE community sets the rules for resource allocation, assignment and transfer policies in the RIPE region. For this the community has the address policy working group. Setting these policies is its function, this is as intended.

Cheers,
Sander

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 2084 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: </ripe/mail/archives/address-policy-wg/attachments/20161026/ce7aa2c9/attachment.p7s>