Hello,
Thank you Sander for the info.
I looked into it. Indeed it was a long discussion.
Only one point:
As you can see, at the time of suggestion of that proposal, there were NO
opposing arguments ( according to available data at that time. )
Now there are new data, specially some experiments with re-allocation of
address spaces through selling/buying them.
Is it possible to re-activate, or re-consider previously approved policies?
Because of this policy for re-allocating address spaces through
selling/buying, now we see a very HOT bazar and
many are making money with it, while none of us ( I mean LIRs ) have paid
for any particular address spaces to RIPE NCC. This is
easily driving people to lie ( make a new LIR, get some IPs, sell it ....
and again and again )
Kind Regards,
Saeed.
-----Original Message-----
From: Sander Steffann
Sent: Saturday, February 21, 2015 4:35 PM
To: Saeed Khademi
Cc: [email protected] Working Group
Subject: *FIREWALL-SPAM ALERT* Re: [address-policy-wg] 2015-01 New Policy
Proposal (Alignment ofTransfer Requirements for IPv4 Allocations)
Hello Saeed,
Now, isn't it possible, that RIPE NCC develops a policy ( maybe there
one ) to take back these advertised address spaces ?
because their initial criteria is not valid any more ? ( obviously those
organization, do not need these address spaces. )
I can understand LEASING some IPs for some period of time, but I can't
understand selling them.
We (this working group) had that discussion in 2007 when policy proposal
2007-08 was introduced. At the time it was decided that reallocation
(transfers) were a better / more viable solution than trying to reclaim
unused addresses. Please take a look at the mailing list archives to see how
the discussion went. It was a quite long discussion.
Proposal 2007-08: https://www.ripe.net/ripe/policies/proposals/2007-08
Mailing list archive:
https://www.ripe.net/search?SearchableText=2007-08&portal_type%3Alist=Message
Cheers,
Sander
