Address space for individuals

  > poole at eunet.ch writes:
  > 
  > As I've pointed out before, the real problem lies in expectations
  > the people have with respect to address allocation. These expectations
  > are formed -long- before they actually contact a local-IR.
  > 
  > What we need are rules that are:
  > 
  > 	- stable (do not change every 6 months).

I contest that the general rules are changing that quickly.
We are refining bits as necessary but we do not change the
general rules.

  > 	- are published (that does -not- mean an announcement
  > 	  of yet another Ripe document on a Ripe mailing list)
  > 	  and announced to a large audience.

What can we do more than publish them as RIPE documents?
We do not have the resources for PR and frankly I think it is
not going to change much at all. A significant amount of requests
is still received by SRI although the InterNIC has done quite some PR and
there have been two different organisations doing it in the interim.

  > 	- have support in the whole Internet community (with
  > 	  other words: are the same in the US)..

We are working on that. But if we want consensus before doing anything,
forget it. I strongly belive we should not be wasteful just because
someone else is. Think globally, act locally. Of course I am also very
open for the needs of *European* ISPs. We shouldn't damage our industry
either.

  > I would not blame people that have applied for address space over 
  > the last three years for coming to the conclusion that the policy 
  > is essentially random.

I have never had that complaint. Many people commented that it was getting
more difficult to obtain address space. That is not random! Also everyone
I talked to understood the reasons and did not object to the policy as such.
Of course many objected to it being applied to themselves.... .