[address-policy-wg] Proposal: Limiting Membership and Allocating IPv4 Subnets in Less Developed Countries

Hi,

On Tue, Apr 09, 2024 at 10:46:07PM +0200, AlbaHost SH.P.K wrote:
> >So, in the RIPE service region, which countries would qualify as
> >"less developed countries"?  By which metric?
> 
> Determining which countries qualify as "less/least developed countries"
> within the RIPE service region is indeed a crucial aspect of this proposal.
> Typically, metrics such as GDP per capital, internet penetration rates, and
> infrastructure development could be considered to identify these countries.

Indeed, but this would need to be spelled out in the proposal.

In other places you state "less developed countries" referring to IPv6
rollout - which is a totally different metric than GDP (Italy comes to
mind).


> >Since there are not many /24s available, and the waiting list is long,
> >it's hard to see how this would make a tangible benefit for the not
> >very clearly specified beneficiaries
> 
> I am late but not too late with such restrictions about two membership per
> entitiy, since this should be implemented long time ago, if you check the
> allocations: https://rex.apnic.net/resources?rir=ripencc  you will see an
> entity with more than 20 multilir accounts hoarding the IPv4 space, for
> only purpose to lease them out and not using them for theirself! And as
> such, that's why we have that long waiting list. I do believe that there is
> still time in which we can prevent it.

How can we prevent something that happened 5+ years ago?

The space is gone, and implementing something now will not get it back
(existing members will consolidate their LIR accounts, not "close and
return the space").

> >How can "you can have more IPv4 space" encourage IPv6 deployment?
> 
> If you have read my proposal carefully i said:  This special consideration
> aims to support the growth and development of internet infrastructure in
> these countries, allowing them to meet their addressing needs while
> transitioning to IPv6 gradually due to their old/infrastructure...

I am listening.  Folks that do not have IPv4 yet won't have "old
infrastructure that can not do IPv6" - and those that do have IPv4 and
old infrastructure (how old can it be?  Cisco's IOS added IPv4 in 1997!)
will not be subject to "can have more address space".

Gert Doering
        -- NetMaster
-- 
have you enabled IPv6 on something today...?

SpaceNet AG                      Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard,
                                           Ingo Lalla, Karin Schuler
Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14        Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann
D-80807 Muenchen                 HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen)
Tel: +49 (0)89/32356-444         USt-IdNr.: DE813185279
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: </ripe/mail/archives/address-policy-wg/attachments/20240410/33ebf053/attachment-0001.sig>