[ncc-services-wg] RIPE tasks

Hank,

On Wed, Aug 13, 2003 at 11:05:42PM +0300, Hank Nussbacher wrote:
>
> On Wed, 13 Aug 2003, David Kessens wrote:
> 
> > The only reason that the RIPE NCC is needed is exactly for the reason
> > that ipv4 addresses are a scarce resource. There might be enough for
> 
> so then, why did I/IUCC have to rejoin RIPE in order to get an IPv6 /32?
> IUCC, as an NREN, hasn't had a need for IPv4 space since we got our /16s
> in the 1980s.  We handed off our membership to ISOC-IL a number of years
> ago to manage the ASN and IPv4 space.  Only once we needed an IPv6 /32 did
> we find out we had to rejoin RIPE NCC and pay membership fees.  If Ipv6
> isn't a scarce resource, then RIPE NCC shouldn't be managing it, 
> according to your logic.  

But if the members agree that it is a useful service to provide to
it's membership it seems perfectly fine for them to provide this
service.

We will need somebody to keep track of who is using what regarding
ipv6 addresses. Since the RIPE NCC already has systems for doing just
that in ipv4, it seems that it is not a bad synergy with their
existing services.

What we don't need is the same restrictive policies as with ipv4 and
as a result the fees, indirect costs and other barriers for getting
ipv6 addresses should be considerable lower than for ipv4 addresses
(which is indeed the case, though some might argue that the barrier is
not low enough yet).

And yes, I don't think that people who want just ipv4 addresses need
to pay for people who want ipv6 addresses. Luckily enough,
interactions with the registry for ipv6 addresses indeed seem to have
been reduced to filling out a fairly simple application only one time.
I haven't heard anybody yet who needed to come back for more addresses
so the cost of providing ipv6 services should indeed actually be quite
a bit lower and be more of the nature of an AS# request.

> We will never ask for IPv4 space or an ASN (we are happy
> with AS378) but will continue to pay our nKeuros/yr just to maintain our
> IPv6 /32.   -Hank

There is organizations out there who have enough addresses or are not
growing and I don't see much reason why they would need to pay high
maintenance/yearly fees each year for the right on a small entry in
the RIPE database. If they want to, it's fine with me but I don't
think they should be required to pay (a lot) more than what they
receive in services (and I do realize that an entry in the database
is really not as cheap as one would think since there is serious
costs involved with running a high quality database service - ip
registries simply don't have the volume advantages as dns
registrars/registries have).

David K.
---