[members-discuss] [ncc-announce] [news] RIPE NCC Members and Multiple LIR Accounts - Please Discuss
- Previous message (by thread): [members-discuss] [ncc-announce] [news] RIPE NCC Members and Multiple LIR Accounts - Please Discuss
- Next message (by thread): [members-discuss] [cs] [ncc-announce] [news] RIPE NCC Members and Multiple LIR Accounts - Please Discuss
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Daniel Stolpe
stolpe at resilans.se
Fri Feb 12 14:49:55 CET 2016
I would be glad to hear someone from the NCC answer to that. I was a bit surprised to find the amount of frustration from the staff, on an issue I was not much aware about. I think that if NCC staff finds this kind of issue a big problem they should let the comunity know. Do they read this mailing list btw? Cheers, Daniel On Fri, 12 Feb 2016, Hal Ponton wrote: > Forgive me if this has already been mentioned in this thread (it's > Friday), but is there not a policy stating a mandatory wait time before > a new LIR can be merged into another? > > If NCC staff can see that 1 LIR is opening new LIR's (even with another > new legal entity behind it), this can be then sent to a review board to > either allow or deny the merge. NCC staff will have the most experience > with this, if they can see someone blatantly breaking the policy they > should be able to at least push the applications to an entity to stop > this behavior. -- -- Regards, > > Hal Ponton > Senior Network Engineer > > Buzcom / FibreWiFi > > > > > Daniel Stolpe > 12 February 2016 at 13:27 > > On Thu, 11 Feb 2016, Sascha Luck [ml] wrote: > > > +1 > > Of course whenever you have rules, someone will be trying to get around them. Stopping "single legal entities" to open additional LIR:s will not make it > impossible to still get several /22:s but at least we will not encourage such behaviour. At the time for RIPE 71 I was told that NCC staff were very frustrated > because they could see this kind of applications and there were not much they could do about it. > > Apparently there are/were cases when entities - or natural persons - were opening *lots* of LIR:s in order to merge them as soon as they received the /22 IPv4. > > Cheers, > > Daniel > > _________________________________________________________________________________ > Daniel Stolpe Tel: 08 - 688 11 81 stolpe at resilans.se > Resilans AB Fax: 08 - 55 00 21 63 http://www.resilans.se/ > Box 45 094 556741-1193 > 104 30 Stockholm > > > ---- > If you don't want to receive emails from the RIPE NCC members-discuss > mailing list, please log in to your LIR Portal account and go to the general page: > https://lirportal.ripe.net/general/ > > Click on "Edit my LIR details", under "Subscribed Mailing Lists". >From here, you can add or remove addresses. > Sascha Luck [ml] > 11 February 2016 at 16:34 > On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 05:25:09PM +0100, Gert Doering wrote: > > > That I could get behind, because this offence, as stated, > requires two facts to be true: > > a) an entity opens another LIR AND > b) it does so in order to circumvent policy > > So, opening another LIR would require the NCC to ascertain motive > before it approves the second LIR and *that* I could live with. > For instance, someone trying to open $lots_of_lirs in a short > time frame would be strong circumstantial evidence that they are > up to no good... > > rgds, > SAscha Luck > > ---- > If you don't want to receive emails from the RIPE NCC members-discuss > mailing list, please log in to your LIR Portal account and go to the general page: > https://lirportal.ripe.net/general/ > > Click on "Edit my LIR details", under "Subscribed Mailing Lists". >From here, you can add or remove addresses. > Gert Doering > 11 February 2016 at 16:25 > Hi, > > Right. > > (And as such, I follow this discussion with some mild amusement - very > engaged, and most of it totally missing the question asked). > > For the record: the policy we have seems to work as it was designed, namely, > "new LIRs can still get IPv4 addresses". Can they get as much as they want? > No. Would they get as much as they want if we loosen up the policy? No(!). > Would that hurt later entrants into the market? Yes. > > Thus, I think the NCC should not permit single entities to open up multiple > LIRs to weasel around policy restrictions. > > Gert Doering > -- no hats > ---- > If you don't want to receive emails from the RIPE NCC members-discuss > mailing list, please log in to your LIR Portal account and go to the general page: > https://lirportal.ripe.net/general/ > > Click on "Edit my LIR details", under "Subscribed Mailing Lists". From here, you can add or remove addresses. > h.lu at anytimechinese.com > 11 February 2016 at 16:15 > Hi > > I think one thing need to be clarified here, if I am not mistaken, Gert and Sander should confirm this as well, how many LIR can a single entity open is an > member issue, how many IP each LIR get, should LIR return address, should v4 allocation request to have v6 in place first etc, is an policy issue need to be > discussed in policy mailing list. > > ? 2016?2?11????5:09?Tim Armstrong <tim at treestle.com> ??? > > That's not viable yet, have you seen how fragmented th v6 table is, even Tier 1 ISPs have gaps. > > I would argue that we just reduce the allocation for additional LIRs. That is if a single legal entity (or it's subsidiaries) register a new LIR, > then the new LIR registered can only receive a /24 not a /22. > > This way no one would act in bad faith trying to skirt the rules, and young ISPs still have the ability to grow without feeling significantly > choked. > > -Tim > > On 11/02/16 17:02, Janis Jaunosans wrote: > just get ipv6. > > On 11/02/16 17:58, Matthias Šubik wrote: > Additionally ? > On 11.02.2016, at 16:26, Simon Lockhart <s.lockhart at cablecomnetworking.co.uk> wrote: > > On Thu Feb 11, 2016 at 04:22:14PM +0100, Sebastian Wiesinger wrote: > * Nigel Titley <exec-board at ripe.net> [2016-02-11 12:02]: > 2. If this activity is a problem that must be prevented, what action > should the RIPE NCC take to attempt its prevention? > > Do not allow additional LIR accounts for a member. > > I would concur. > > One legal entity, one LIR. This should be easy for RIPE to implement, given > that they require evidence of company registration or equivalent when > establishing an LIR. > > Even if it is possible to open more legal entities in the RIPE region, when requiring an exclusive contact person it makes it not > any harder for really new members, but harder for self cloning of members. > > It might even be needed, to require the new contact person to complete the RIPE course, to slow down abusive behavior. > The use of a simple nominee is therefor more difficult than without the course requirement. > > just my two cents > Matthias > > > > ---- > If you don't want to receive emails from the RIPE NCC members-discuss > mailing list, please log in to your LIR Portal account and go to the general page: > https://lirportal.ripe.net/general/ > > Click on "Edit my LIR details", under "Subscribed Mailing Lists". From here, you can add or remove addresses. > > > ---- > If you don't want to receive emails from the RIPE NCC members-discuss > mailing list, please log in to your LIR Portal account and go to the general page: > https://lirportal.ripe.net/general/ > > Click on "Edit my LIR details", under "Subscribed Mailing Lists". From here, you can add or remove addresses. > > ---- > If you don't want to receive emails from the RIPE NCC members-discuss > mailing list, please log in to your LIR Portal account and go to the general page: > https://lirportal.ripe.net/general/ > > Click on "Edit my LIR details", under "Subscribed Mailing Lists". From here, you can add or remove addresses. > Tim Armstrong > 11 February 2016 at 16:09 > That's not viable yet, have you seen how fragmented the v6 table is, even Tier 1 ISPs have gaps. > > I would argue that we just reduce the allocation for additional LIRs. That is if a single legal entity (or it's subsidiaries) register a new LIR, then the new > LIR registered can only receive a /24 not a /22. > > This way no one would act in bad faith trying to skirt the rules, and young ISPs still have the ability to grow without feeling significantly choked. > > -Tim > > On 11/02/16 17:02, Janis Jaunosans wrote: > > ---- > If you don't want to receive emails from the RIPE NCC members-discuss > mailing list, please log in to your LIR Portal account and go to the general page: > https://lirportal.ripe.net/general/ > > Click on "Edit my LIR details", under "Subscribed Mailing Lists". From here, you can add or remove addresses. _________________________________________________________________________________ Daniel Stolpe Tel: 08 - 688 11 81 stolpe at resilans.se Resilans AB Fax: 08 - 55 00 21 63 http://www.resilans.se/ Box 45 094 556741-1193 104 30 Stockholm
- Previous message (by thread): [members-discuss] [ncc-announce] [news] RIPE NCC Members and Multiple LIR Accounts - Please Discuss
- Next message (by thread): [members-discuss] [cs] [ncc-announce] [news] RIPE NCC Members and Multiple LIR Accounts - Please Discuss
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]