Hi Sander,
Il 20/06/2016 23:00, Sander Steffann ha scritto:
Hi Riccardo,
Teorically not, but practically creates class-b LIRs. I am against speculators
but I would not like discrimination between old and new LIRs.
There is none, please stop repeating that.
I can ask the same
If we had a proposal that changes the policy behaviour creating a new
fantasy example category "ALLOCATED BEFORE FINAL" to all allocation
created before 14/09/2012 this would be discriminating anyone received
such kind of allocation from who didn't.
Positive or negative discrimination depends on how it will affect such
allocation. In all cases would create problems. History repeating.
The current policies even in other RIR (i think it, i am not so informed
about that and can be wrong) are trying to move over "colors" and not
using them to discriminate between allocations.
PI can be converted in PA easily in RIPE. Why shouldn't be the same for
an newly invented "ALLOCATED BEFORE FINAL" or an "ALLOCATED FINAL"?
At RIPE meetings Registration Services make an update about the status
of the database and there's some slide titeled "IPv4 blocks with status
that cause issues"
You know what? there's is mentioned ALLOCATED PI, ALLOCATED UNSPECIFIED.
This means discrimination between allocation creates problem to LIRs.
I really don't see any reason to create fantasy colors when at RIPE
meetings it has been asked publically to take an effort on moving over it.
I invite you to read these from Registration Services update about
different colors allocations:
https://ripe71.ripe.net/presentations/86-FeedbackRS-RIPE71.pdf
https://ripe72.ripe.net/presentations/112-FeedbackRS-RIPE72_final.pdf
[...]
RIPE NCC encourages:
- LIRs to strive to convert to ASSIGNED PA
“Where possible, LIRs should work to make contractual arrangements to
convert PI addresses into PA addresses.”
- LIRs to not create new ASSIGNED PI
- Where possible to convert to ALLOCATED PA
[...]
I wouldn't like to be discriminated. You would like to be?
This is a ridiculous statement. Enough.
read above.
Every LIR is the same with the same rights. Under the proposed policy every LIR
gets a /22, and no LIR can sell that /22.
True but unnecessary
What you keep complaining about is that new LIRs can't get as many IPv4
addresses for free as LIRs that started before September 2012. That is just the
way it is. Policy changes over time, and things that were possible in the past
are no longer possible today. Circumstances change. If we (the community)
hadn't changed the policy like that then there would be no addresses to give
out at all anymore.
I am not complaing about that discussing this policy I was just thanking
again old LIRs 'cause Gert remembered me the same note here.
But all of that has nothing to do with this policy discussion. In your previous
message you spoke about the bottom up process, that it means that everybody has
to be listened to. That is almost correct.
What it means is that everybody is allowed to speak and have their arguments
considered seriously. If those arguments are found to be false then they can be
put aside, and nobody is required to keep listening to endless repeats of those
same rejected arguments.
Cheers,
Sander
I am not thinking my arguments are false.
regards
Riccardo
--
WIREM Fiber Revolution
Net-IT s.r.l.
Via Cesare Montanari, 2
47521 Cesena (FC)
Tel +39 0547 1955485
Fax +39 0547 1950285
--------------------------------------------------------------------
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
This message and its attachments are addressed solely to the persons
above and may contain confidential information. If you have received
the message in error, be informed that any use of the content hereof
is prohibited. Please return it immediately to the sender and delete
the message. Should you have any questions, please contact us by re-
plying to [email protected]
Thank you
WIREM - Net-IT s.r.l.Via Cesare Montanari, 2 - 47521 Cesena (FC)
--------------------------------------------------------------------
