<html> <head> <meta content="text/html; charset=windows-1252" http-equiv="Content-Type"> </head> <body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000"> Goodmoring Remco, I read that you don't want to comment more about 2015-05. I'll respect you and I won't wait for an answer and we can leave everything for a quick chat in Copenhagen but I have to leave my comment on your analisys. In your example you suppose that every LIR under a /20 will request an additional /22 (every 18 months after a /22 allocation has been reiceved) and standing on you will litterally "burn" out the space in 3 years. Let's see what has been done in the past: In september 2012 there were about 9000 LIRs members and at the end of 2013 the number grows up to 10000 LIRs. So in your view "last /8" would have distributed about 10000 /22 on 15130 availables from 185/8 at the end of 2013, leaving about 5000 /22 in the pool. In this vision you couldn't expect to leave to new entrants no more than 5 - 6 thousand /22. Please explain how the current policy obtained a "success", luck? Why such policy was accepted and reached its consensum at that time? 2015-05 requires to act for IPv6 Current policy required in the past to obtain an IPv6 allocation and do exacly nothing more Nowadays the allocation policy requires just pay the fee and do nothing. regards Riccardo <div class="moz-cite-prefix">Il 11/05/2016 21:53, Remco van Mook ha scritto: </div> <blockquote cite="mid:8AAFE154-67DE-4867-A2F1-1B7F56AA2819@gmail.com" type="cite"> <pre wrap=""> </pre> <blockquote type="cite"> <pre wrap="">On 11 May 2016, at 14:52 , Radu-Adrian FEURDEAN <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:ripe-wgs@radu-adrian.feurdean.net"><ripe-wgs@radu-adrian.feurdean.net></a> wrote: On Wed, May 11, 2016, at 09:47, Remco van Mook wrote: </pre> <blockquote type="cite"> <pre wrap="">Again, you can't have it both ways. Current policy is not limited to 185/8, so your proposal does have an impact. Actually 185/8 is more than half gone by now (9571 allocations that I can see as of this morning) - effectively this means the proposal wants over half of what remains in the pool to get released to existing LIRs who've already received their last /22. This cuts the lifespan of the pool for new entrants by more than half, no? </pre> </blockquote> <pre wrap=""> No, because: - it will not be dedicated to "further allocations" - there are some extra conditions that makes a lot of people not to qualify - with the time passing, when 185/8 is over, the "first /22 from last /8" will start being allocated from the same space as "further allocations". </pre> </blockquote> <pre wrap=""> OK, have it your way. Let's look at some numbers: Available in 185/8 right now: ~ 6,950 /22s (1) Available outside 185/8 right now: ~ 8,180 /22s (1) New LIRs since January 2013: ~4,600 (2,3) Budgeted membership growth for the rest of 2016: ~ 1,500 (2) Before 2016 is out, around 4,000 existing LIRs will have qualified under the proposed policy to get another allocation. Half the 'outside 185' pool will be gone by the end of this year. Based on an extrapolated growth rate of new members, the '185' pool should last until early 2019. At that point, another 4,000 existing LIRs will have qualified under the proposed policy for another /22 from the 'outside' pool. This pool is now empty as well. So, under the new policy, it will be game over for all involved somewhere in early 2019. The space you argue would be available for new entrants outside the '185 pool' was gone by the time it was needed. Now let's look at the current policy. As of today, a total of about 15,130 /22s are available. Based on an extrapolated growth rate of new members, the available pool should last until 2025 (although the uncertainties are quite high if you extrapolate that far out) So on one hand, we have a proposal that will be game over for all in about 3 years, or we keep the existing policy that shares the pain for existing and future LIRs well into the next decade. At which point, IPv6 will have saved the world from global heating, or so they tell me. The proposed policy has an impact (even the policy proposal itself says so (4)), and one that I strongly object to. (if any of the NCC staff wants to verify my numbers, feel free to do so) Sources: 1) <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.ripe.net/publications/ipv6-info-centre/about-ipv6/ipv4-exhaustion/ipv4-available-pool-graph">https://www.ripe.net/publications/ipv6-info-centre/about-ipv6/ipv4-exhaustion/ipv4-available-pool-graph</a> 2) <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.ripe.net/participate/meetings/gm/meetings/may-2016/supporting-documents/ripe-ncc-annual-report-2015">https://www.ripe.net/participate/meetings/gm/meetings/may-2016/supporting-documents/ripe-ncc-annual-report-2015</a> 3) <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://labs.ripe.net/statistics">https://labs.ripe.net/statistics</a> 4) <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.ripe.net/participate/policies/proposals/2015-05">https://www.ripe.net/participate/policies/proposals/2015-05</a> Remco (no hats) </pre> </blockquote> <div class="moz-signature">-- <pre>Ing. Riccardo Gori e-mail: <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:rgori@wirem.net">rgori@wirem.net</a> Mobile: +39 339 8925947 Mobile: +34 602 009 437 Profile: <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://it.linkedin.com/in/riccardo-gori-74201943">https://it.linkedin.com/in/riccardo-gori-74201943</a> </pre> <img src="cid:part1.D436DB7D.53B759B6@wirem.net" width="200"> <pre>WIREM Fiber Revolution Net-IT s.r.l. Via Cesare Montanari, 2 47521 Cesena (FC) Tel +39 0547 1955485 Fax +39 0547 1950285 -------------------------------------------------------------------- CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE This message and its attachments are addressed solely to the persons above and may contain confidential information. If you have received the message in error, be informed that any use of the content hereof is prohibited. Please return it immediately to the sender and delete the message. Should you have any questions, please contact us by re- plying to <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:info@wirem.net">info@wirem.net</a> Thank you WIREM - Net-IT s.r.l.Via Cesare Montanari, 2 - 47521 Cesena (FC) -------------------------------------------------------------------- </pre> </div> </body> </html>