<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"/></head><body style="font-family:Geneva,Helvetica,Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 12px;">> *Allow IPv4 PI from the transfer market Very good idea! <div> -- </div> <div> Alexey Ivanov </div> 08.11.2012 01:57 - David Farmer написал(а): <div style="border:none;border-left:solid blue 1.5pt;padding:0cm 0cm 0cm 4.0pt" type="cite"> On 11/7/12 14:17 , Yannis Nikolopoulos wrote: > Hello Gert, > > As Richard said, the question here is whether we should > hand out PI from the last /8 or not. I think there is another viable option; *Allow IPv4 PI from the transfer market But, I by my read of RIPE policy this isn't allow, or its not clear to me that it is allowed when I read the policy. If, I'm wrong about this please correct me. If the RIPE community doesn't want to make IPv4 PI assignments out of its last /8, I think that is defensible. If someone wants something out of the last /8, making them become an LIR seems reasonable as well. However, saying there is no such thing as IPv4 PI any longer is not reasonable when there is a viable transfer market available as a source of addresses. The whole point of creating a IPv4 transfer market was to encourage getting unused or underutilized IPv4 addresses in to the hands of those that need them. End users need for IPv4 PI is just as important and valid of a use for IPv4 as ISP need for IPv4. Shutting IPv4 PI out of the last /8 is one thing, shutting IPv4 PI out of the transfer market is another and doesn't seem justified. -- ================================================= David Farmer Email: farmer@umn.edu Office of Information Technology University of Minnesota 2218 University Ave SE Phone: 1-612-626-0815 Minneapolis, MN 55414-3029 Cell: 1-612-812-9952 ================================================= </div> </body></html>