Criteria for initial PA Allocation

  Just some observations...

=> So, what is my conclusion?  I estimate that while IPv4 address exhaustion
=> is going to be a problem (which IPv6 will solve), the routing topology 
=> will cause major problems *sooner* than IPv4 runs out, and we should
=> do something against this.  By this, I mean:
=> 
=>  - strongly encourage people to renumber from historic PI space to
=>    PA space from their ISPs network block (and return the PI space
=>    to the RIRs, to be aggregated)
=
:-) the finest way would be turning it "mandatory"...
=i know this problem very well, as i've already done too much work
=recovering some 192.x.x.x still given by ARIN... :-)

  This ship has left the harbour many moons ago...

  You can no longer honestly advocate that path to any site (without the
  support of _all_ ISP on the routing layer - which I expect to be nil)
  when the rules for obtaining address space in general, and PI in
  particular, have been tightened and can be expected to become even more
  restrictive in the future.

=I still didnt finish this on my clients because some of them see it as a
="RESOURCE", and some are trying to X*Y valid addrissing by only returning
=X address space... :-(

  they got it ;-)
 
=>  - stop handing out PI space
=
=:-) well... could RIPE just talk to registered ISPs...?
=I think this is very, very hard thing...

  Only a short while ago the community agreed that it is not reasonably
  possible to define what an ISP is.
 
=>  - discourage people from becoming LIR if that's only to get "portable"
=>    address space, with no intention of handing PA space out to customers.
=
=no customers = no ISP ?

  Be careful. You run into the same problem here, trying to define what a
  "customer" is.
  
  Just another aspect here, we tend to _again_ mix the concepts and
  responsibities of RIRs, LIRs and ISPs for the Internet (mind the capital
  "I" here).
  
  The ISPs collaboratively operating the Internet are responsible for the
  routing aspects. However, this should not prevent anyone for becoming an
  LIR and/or from obtaining globally unique IPv4 addresses - as long as
  they can document a need for them.

  This need does not necessarily involve connectivity to the Internet.
  Building an internet should be enough.

=> Yes, this might sound a bit harsh, but I'm *really* worried about
=> routeability and reachability of anything in the next couple of years.
=
=Yep... i see more than 104.000...

 Well, for the moment I consider that point moot.
 
  For quite a while the information has been made available (T.B., pfs
  reports) where the Internet could be improved (routing-wise) by e.g.
  aggregating and/or removing excessive announcements. In reality nobody
  really seesm to care (more than uttering their disgust :-), otherwise we
  would see real activity to get the broken ASes fixed (or filtered or
  disconnected), and an improvement.
 
=> Now go and flame me... :-)
=
=That's not the intention of it.
= 
=> Gert Doering
=>         -- NetMaster
=> -- 
=> SpaceNet AG                 Mail: netmaster at Space.Net
=> Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14   Tel : +49-89-32356-0
=> 80807 Muenchen              Fax : +49-89-32356-299
=> 
=
=./Carlos
=                                                          "Networking is fun!"
=-------------------
=<cfriacas at fccn.pt>, CMF8-RIPE, Wide Area Network WorkGroup  http://www.fccn.pt
=F.C.C.N. - Fundacao para a Computacao Cientifica Nacional  fax: +351 218472167

  Wilfried.
 _________________________________:_____________________________________
  Wilfried Woeber                 : e-mail: Woeber at CC.UniVie.ac.at
  UniVie Computer Center - ACOnet : Tel: +43 1 4277 - 140 33
  Universitaetsstrasse 7          : Fax: +43 1 4277 - 9 140
  A-1010 Vienna, Austria, Europe  : RIPE-DB: WW144, PGP keyID 0xF0ACB369
 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~:~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~