[members-discuss] VL: IP transfer (in)security

William, I want to state from the start that I am not a supporter of legacy resources being reclaimed by Iana or any RIR.

 

But, I want to ask you something. Let’s take the example of guns in the US. At this moment it is perfectly legal to buy a gun (from Walmart even) without too much hassle. But let’s say a gun control law gets passed that states you have to return all but one gun you ever bought. Would you consider this theft as well? 

 

Maybe you don’t consider this a good example. Let’s take the example of a controlled substance. 20 years ago it wasn’t controlled, and anyone could get it and use it with no regulation. But after a while it’s considered a controlled substance and the use of it without justification/strict regulation is not allowed anymore, any quantity owned and not justified must be returned/destroyed. This would also be theft in your opinion?

 

What I am trying to say is that changes happen everyday in this world, what was legal or unregulated x years ago, can become illegal or regulated. I think same thing can apply to legacy Ipv4 resources, if this is what is wanted/considered necessary.

 

Regards, 

Matei Storch
[F]: General Manager
[M]: +40728.555.004
[E]: matei at profisol.ro <mailto:matei at profisol.ro> 
[C]: Profisol Telecom



 

From: members-discuss [mailto:members-discuss-bounces at ripe.net] On Behalf Of William
Sent: Monday, May 14, 2018 14:51
To: Adrian Bolster <adrian.bolster at purebroadband.net>
Cc: members-discuss at ripe.net
Subject: Re: [members-discuss] VL: IP transfer (in)security

 

You again confuse things here (or ignore them on purpose).

 

Legacy IPs are *not* in LIR accounts in most cases and mostly not RIPE.

 

You can talk all you want, but this matter is not a choice of RIPE, APNIC or all RIRs together in any way - it ends with a lawsuit based on US law against ICANN/IANA by the property owners, and nowhere else.

 

Unless someone magically puts up the money to buy all legacy at market rates + some and wants to give it to the RIRs for free, there is no chance in hell they will go back to any pool.

--

William Weber

Consulting, Security & Management - Tel-Aviv, Israel / Rijeka, Croatia

 

https://ip6.im <https://ip6.im/>  - No RIPE LIR? Still read this email for some reason? Grab a /40 *free* IPv6 space for BGP usage. Or just get it anyway, can't hurt to have.

 

 

On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 13:35, Adrian Bolster <adrian.bolster at purebroadband.net <mailto:adrian.bolster at purebroadband.net> > wrote:

I wholeheartedly agree, it’s not in the best interests of the internet community as a whole to continue to allow huge amounts of address space to remain unused to their full potential. 


On 14 May 2018, at 12:40, David Benwell <dave at it-communicationsltd.co.uk <mailto:dave at it-communicationsltd.co.uk> > wrote:

No its about preventing the waste of IP Addresses. Why allow a LLR to retain address space that they may never have used.



 


 


 

From: members-discuss [mailto:members-discuss-bounces at ripe.net] On Behalf Of William
Sent: 14 May 2018 12:32
To: Bunea TELECOM <suport at bunea.eu <mailto:suport at bunea.eu> >
Cc: members-discuss at ripe.net <mailto:members-discuss at ripe.net> 
Subject: Re: [members-discuss] VL: IP transfer (in)security




 

But this does not CHANGE IT IS THEFT, please have a look at your history (or here in Croatia) - you want to do the same, steal from some parts of the society ('the rich') to 'benefit' the whole which ends horribly wrong.




 

This discussion is almost as absurd as the Russian suggestion to move RIPE to Moscow.




 

--



William Weber



Consulting, Security & Management - Tel-Aviv, Israel / Rijeka, Croatia



 



https://ip6.im - No RIPE LIR? Still read this email for some reason? Grab a /40 *free* IPv6 space for BGP usage. Or just get it anyway, can't hurt to have.




 


 


 

On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 13:16, Bunea TELECOM <suport at bunea.eu <mailto:suport at bunea.eu> > wrote:



Everybody that says it’s theft, please consider the fact that those ‘guys’ got their hands on /8 blocks tens of years ago, and probably did not pay a dime for them.



In the light of events, one /8, respecting the 1024 IPv4 policy that RIPE has, would belong to over 16.000 LIR accounts!



And I must say, 16.000 companies would create a lot of business compared to one company that holds a /8 :)




 

Thanks



—




 


<image001.jpg>







Petru Bunea / CEO 
 <mailto:suport at bunea.eu> suport at bunea.eu / +40752481282 <tel:+40752481282> 



Bunea TELECOM / DATACENTER / APP DEVELOPMENT
 <http://www.bunea.eu/> http://www.bunea.eu / +40745495495 <tel:+40745495495> 






 

On 14 May 2018, at 14:16, Alex Lobachov <alxl at telenet.lv <mailto:alxl at telenet.lv> > wrote:




 

Bruno has it’s point.



 



Legacy parts of the space should be reclaimed, but only ICANN has the power to do so.



 



I don’t like to call it a thief, I’d rather say as all IP space is rented (owning a number isn’t bright), all that rented space, wherever it is legacy or current should be re-audited to justify the reason of use.



 




--
Alex Lobachov
Telenet, sia
Network Systems Engineer
LinkedIn: https://lv.linkedin.com/in/allxll
E-mail: alxl at telenet.lv <mailto:alxl at telenet.lv> 
Skype: alxl__
Direct office: +371 67886224
Office: +371 67711111



 



From: Bruno Carvalho <mailto:bruno.carvalho at xrv.pt>  



Sent: Monday, May 14, 2018 2:04 PM



To: members-discuss at ripe.net <mailto:members-discuss at ripe.net>  



Subject: Re: [members-discuss] VL: IP transfer (in)security



 



William,



Legacy or not, at one point a regulation was introduced. And everyone should be regulated (pre-RIR or not).



Is the same has if you own a car from back the traffic laws (1800 years?). If you drive it now, you have to comply with all the laws that regulate the sector.
Why the legacy address space owners shouldn't have to comply with the actual regulations?



If we look deep on the spaces between 0.0.0.0 and 255.255.255.255 (that are not local or bogons), i bet that most than 50% are legacy and not used.



---




  <https://www.xrv.pt/templates/xrv/html/img/xrv.png> 



Bruno Carvalho (CEO xrv.pt <http://xrv.pt> ) | +351 300 404 316
P Please consider the environment before printing this email



 <https://www.xrv.pt/> 
 <https://www.facebook.com/xervers/>  <https://twitter.com/xervers> 



 



On 2018-05-14 12:46, William wrote:



 



These are legacy. They are not RIR business. 



 



No RIR can reclaim them (and reclaim is plainly wrong, they never owned them, this is pre-RIR space), they are private property.



 



Taking them is theft and nothing else, no matter how you phrase it.



 



--



William Weber



Consulting, Security & Management - Tel-Aviv, Israel / Rijeka, Croatia



 



https://ip6.im <https://ip6.im/>  - No RIPE LIR? Still read this email for some reason? Grab a /40 *free* IPv6 space for BGP usage. Or just get it anyway, can't hurt to have.



 



 



 




 

On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 12:27, Bunea TELECOM <suport at bunea.eu <mailto:suport at bunea.eu> > wrote:



I agree, 



 



There are tens of /8's available, some of them even unannounced. For example there are lots of entities which if they would gave up (even partially) of their unused blocks, it would push the IPv4 complete exaustion to 2020+. 



 



Thanks,



Petru



—



 




<email-signature.jpg> 







Petru Bunea / CEO 
 <mailto:suport at bunea.eu> suport at bunea.eu / +40752481282 <tel:+40752481282> 



Bunea TELECOM / DATACENTER / APP DEVELOPMENT
 <http://www.bunea.eu/> http://www.bunea.eu / +40745495495 <tel:+40745495495> 





 



On 14 May 2018, at 11:20, Janarthanan Sundaram <j.sundaram at 123telcom.nl <mailto:j.sundaram at 123telcom.nl> > wrote:



 



I think we should prioritize on on point two: what to do with unused blocks.




 



Van: members-discuss <members-discuss-bounces at ripe.net <mailto:members-discuss-bounces at ripe.net> > Namens Bruno Carvalho
Verzonden: maandag 14 mei 2018 10:11
Aan: members-discuss at ripe.net <mailto:members-discuss at ripe.net> 
Onderwerp: Re: [members-discuss] VL: IP transfer (in)security



 



This discussion is quite interesting. But i think it should be discussed between all RiRs. Not only for RIPE.
When we look at big companies, like Microsoft, and do a simple scan of their assigned IP ranges... we found some /14 and several /16 unassigned/unused ranges.


Personnally, i think we should focus on 2 main things:


- Improve IPv6 implementation all over the territory (i know this is painfull for many LIRs because it implies additional work and purchase of new equipments. But let's face it. We are in 2018. If an equipment doesn't support IPv6, it's very obsolete and not performant).


- Check with the other RiRs what would be the best to do with those big unused ranges that are owned by companies that don't use them.


Regards





---




<blocked.gif>



Bruno Carvalho (CEO xrv.pt <http://xrv.pt/> ) | +351 300 404 316
P Please consider the environment before printing this email





 <https://www.xrv.pt/> <blocked.gif>
 <https://www.facebook.com/xervers/> <blocked.gif> <https://twitter.com/xervers> <blocked.gif>




 

On 2018-05-14 09:51, Hans Govenius wrote:







Hello

Not needed IP = The addressese company is ready to sell for a small profit 😊 ? This is probably good indication that its not used anymore. One option is to automatically block all and any IP transaction which does not involve transaction of the whole company/business. It is a question that can IP be a commodity. Now its a commodity that is getting more rare by the year. Maybe IP should be considered an jointly owned part of infrastructure which is deployed by need basis. (Socialistic way)

Other option is to start to take money per IP. This would instantly mean that everyone would look up to own ip spaces. Let say it would cost 1 euro / year for a IP it would only be approx 1000 euros for the smallest allocation. Someone with 10 million IP addressese are likely to happily pay for it fi they are in use, but if they are not i would think they would be handed back. (Capitalistic way)

One option is also to go with the current system because internet is working so its not horribly wrong at the moment either. 

One interesting this is tho that old LIR:s are likely to wanting to keep these things unchanged. New LIR:s are more likely to want changes as this is heavily favoring old LIR:s. And every year a proportionally larger part will be the ones with few IP:s and same vote than the one with alot of IP:s and also only 1 vote. 

Br. Hans 




-----Alkuperäinen viesti-----
Lähettäjä: members-discuss < <mailto:members-discuss-bounces at ripe.net> members-discuss-bounces at ripe.net> Puolesta REG ID: pl.skonet
Lähetetty: maanantai 14. toukokuuta 2018 10.34
Vastaanottaja:  <mailto:pdonner at znak.fi> pdonner at znak.fi;  <mailto:members-discuss at ripe.net> members-discuss at ripe.net
Aihe: Re: [members-discuss] VL: IP transfer (in)security

W dniu 14.05.2018 o 09:25, Philip Donner pisze: 




I would like to amplify Dave's good proposal, by suggesting that unused addresses should be handed back to RIPE, so that they can be added to a pool of addresses reserved for LIRs who needs them for non-profit promotion of IP networks.






Ok, but there is never ending story to resolve: how to define 'unused addresses'. Because not announced in BGP definitely != not used.

-- 

Tomasz Śląski
pl.skonet


_______________________________________________
members-discuss mailing list
 <mailto:members-discuss at ripe.net> members-discuss at ripe.net
 <https://mailman.ripe.net/> https://mailman.ripe.net/
Unsubscribe:  <https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/options/members-discuss/hans.govenius%40devnet.fi> https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/options/members-discuss/hans.govenius%40devnet.fi
_______________________________________________
members-discuss mailing list
 <mailto:members-discuss at ripe.net> members-discuss at ripe.net
 <https://mailman.ripe.net/> https://mailman.ripe.net/
Unsubscribe:  <https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/options/members-discuss/bruno.carvalho%40xrv.pt> https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/options/members-discuss/bruno.carvalho%40xrv.pt



_______________________________________________
members-discuss mailing list
members-discuss at ripe.net <mailto:members-discuss at ripe.net> 
https://mailman.ripe.net/
Unsubscribe: https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/options/members-discuss/suport%40bunea.eu




 

_______________________________________________
members-discuss mailing list
members-discuss at ripe.net <mailto:members-discuss at ripe.net> 
https://mailman.ripe.net/
Unsubscribe: https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/options/members-discuss/bruno.carvalho%40xrv.pt




 


  _____  


_______________________________________________
members-discuss mailing list
members-discuss at ripe.net <mailto:members-discuss at ripe.net> 
https://mailman.ripe.net/
Unsubscribe: https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/options/members-discuss/alxl%40telenet.lv



_______________________________________________
members-discuss mailing list
members-discuss at ripe.net <mailto:members-discuss at ripe.net> 
https://mailman.ripe.net/
Unsubscribe: https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/options/members-discuss/suport%40bunea.eu




 

_______________________________________________
members-discuss mailing list
members-discuss at ripe.net <mailto:members-discuss at ripe.net> 
https://mailman.ripe.net/
Unsubscribe: https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/options/members-discuss/adrian.bolster%40surebroadband.net

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://www.ripe.net/ripe/mail/archives/members-discuss/attachments/20180514/4940efbe/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.png
Type: image/png
Size: 15078 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://www.ripe.net/ripe/mail/archives/members-discuss/attachments/20180514/4940efbe/attachment.png>