[members-discuss] [comms] [ncc-announce] [news] RIPE NCC Members and Multiple
- Previous message (by thread): [members-discuss] [comms] [ncc-announce] [news] RIPE NCC Members and Multiple
- Next message (by thread): [members-discuss] [comms] [ncc-announce] [news] RIPE NCC Members and Multiple
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Thomas Mangin
thomas.mangin at exa-networks.co.uk
Wed Feb 17 14:37:54 CET 2016
Hi, So .. replying to myself :wink: Proposed solution: > You make a new lir to get a /22 ok, then you cannot sell the ip > address > space. > If the lir is for whatever reason closed the ip address space should > be > requested back. > Nobody will create a new lir for a /22 and pay the fees required if > the > address space given it`s tied to that lir, it will just be to > expensive. I would love to live in a world where this solution works. When you forbid a product which has customer (buying IP space, drugs, other) all you are doing is moving the problem to an un-regulated market where the buyer (the innocent network who NEEDS the IP space and is down the wall) is going to be abused (US prohibition / war on drugs). While I morally totally agree with the principle, I can not see how it can be applied in a way which does not create more problems than it fixes. Thomas
- Previous message (by thread): [members-discuss] [comms] [ncc-announce] [news] RIPE NCC Members and Multiple
- Next message (by thread): [members-discuss] [comms] [ncc-announce] [news] RIPE NCC Members and Multiple
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]