[address-policy-wg] 2019-02 New Policy Proposal (Reducing IPv4 Allocations to a /24) (fwd)

Moin,

am 06.02.2019 um 00:25 schrieb Cedric R via address-policy-wg:
> Why not doing a prupose based on LIR, a first lir account receive a /22, if a same entity open a second account, they only receive a /24.

First: it just won't be "the same entity". While it may be the same actors, it's usually a separate legal entity, so no cookies.

Second: as soon as the currently available IPv4 resources fell dry, there's an issue: by current policy, a new LIR is entitled to receive a /22 worth of addresses. If RIPE NCC cannot serve this at registration time, what happens then? AFAIKS this ist not yet covered by policy.

> That prupose is to avoid some LIR with huge amount take all space and let's nothing for small LIR wo can't do.

Sorry to say this, but: that has been tried to avoid and proved to be "difficult" at best. One cannot prevent others from going corporate a dozen of times, each time setting up an LIR, each time taking a /something IPv4. Not easily, not without hurting legitimate newcomers.

> Actualy a /22 from RIPE cost 4800€ VAT EXCL (2 year + setup) , on market it's 15- 20K€

Yes, but raising the RIPE membership fee to 10k/year would face other issues (like, being a non-profit, what to do with the surplus? Redistributing it to the members would just mean _entry_ is expensive, not _staying_) ...

> I know some company can have multiple entity to buy extra range. Some company is cheap to register like in UK.
> Maybe use company UBO registry obligation in EU can fight that ?

RIPE Region does cover more than just EU (EU28 or EU27 doesn't matter here).

Regards,
-kai