-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256
Dear Aled, dear all, On 13/06/2016 17:29, Aled Morris wrote: > On 13 June 2016 at 16:15, Sylvain Vallerot <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >> I agree with this : remaining IPs are not intended to be used as we used >> to. >> But they are still meant to be distributed to end users, aren't they ? > > RIPE-649 "IPv4 Address Allocation and Assignment Policies for the RIPE NCC > Service Region" > Section 5.1 Allocations made by the RIPE NCC to LIRs > 3. The LIR must confirm it will make assignment(s) from the allocation. > ... > > It doesn't say who these assignments are to, they could be to the LIR > itself for their own use (as it will be in the case of end-users who > have become LIRs purely to obtain some "psuedo-PI" address space.) LIRs being (quite likely) End Users, this is fine. But we definitely cannot assume that all End Users are LIRs, nor make a policy take it for granted. Put in another words we cannot have a policy say that an End User needs to be a LIR to have a chance to get access to the ressource. Allowing future End Users to have a tiny bit of IPv4 to bootstrap means allowing *End Users*, not just those that are LIRs. Right ? I would appreciate a confirmation from the "sitting-ones" that my understanding of the spirit of the last /8 policy is correct on this point because I sometimes doubt it when reading things like proposal 2013-03. Best regards, Sylvain -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1 iF4EAREIAAYFAlde1AMACgkQJBGsD8mtnRHH4gD/duowiNMLW8a1E1SRuYj3UgBK QczJw7sdCw4bGICrmvEA/AjXyqIkX0xBBxk91zTgbIbVvqsVlEaPBZ/F9bygbaki =ZT3L -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
