Hi Jeroen What is the real reason for this push to dump assignments? I just don't buy these arguments.
On Mon, 15 May 2023 at 21:41, Jeroen Lauwers <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi Everyone, > > > Now RIPE 86 is around the corner Tore and I would like to check if there is > any interest in changing the way of making assignments in the IPv4 policy. At > this moment we got 3 major points coming repetitively back from the community. > > 1. The current policy asks for a lot of repetitive work in making these > assignments and it would be nice if, with a policy change, a lot of this > repetitive work could be taken away. I know it is an odd thing to consider in this industry, but this is what computers are good at doing. It is 2023. Everyone is talking about how AI is going to take control of humanity soon. But the internet industry cannot automate the syncing of your internal IPAM with the RIPE Database? I don't think we need to worry about AI yet. > > 2. There is a lot of under and over-assigning in the RIPE DB where a policy > change would be beneficial to take some of the reasons away for this. We don't need to take away reasons, we just need to automate and do it properly. > > 3. Policy 6.3 “Network Infrastructure and End User Networks” can be > interpreted differently for what the right use case is. I don't see anything in 6.2 that is open to interpretation or relevant to the case for dumping assignments. > > Including the feedback from the previous policy proposal, we are thinking > about introducing AGGREGATED-BY-LIR status just as in the IPv6 policy. In > this way, we can aggregate multiple assignments into one AGGREGATED-BY-LIR > assignment which we think would result in improving the above-mentioned > points. I think it is a bad idea to hide the users of blocks of IP addresses from the public in a public registry database. With a modern approach to creating the data in the database, there is no need for AGGREGATED-BY-LIR for either IPv4 or IPv6. The RIPE Database is not just for the benefit of resource holders, it is a public registry. I don't care if we have 10m assignments, 20m assignments as IPv6 gathers momentum. With automated data generation it is not a problem to create the correct data and keep it up to date. With a good query interface anyone interested in information about one IP address can easily and quickly find it. The other 20m entries are not a problem. There is also the issue of responsibility and liability. All resource holders (members) have signed an SSA. In that agreement they accept legal responsibility and liability for any and all usage of their allocated address space. With an updated, automated data generation process the RIPE Database will publicly show the correct details for who this responsibility and liability has been delegated to. Anyone pursuing a civil action or any LEA pursuing a criminal action can apply that action to the most specific user of the address space in question. If you hide the details of the end users, they only have the resource holders details. But as the resource holder has legally accepted full responsibility and liability for any and all usage of this address space, I see no reason why an LEA can't take action against the resource holder for any criminal activity involving their allocated address space. Why would they bother to get court orders in multiple languages and legal jurisdictions to find the end user details when they know who has accepted responsibility and liability...the resource holder. If you hide all your end user details, don't be surprised if you are held accountable. I have also heard the argument that many resource holders don't want to publish details of their customers for fear of another resource holder trying to offer them a better deal. In the IPv4 world there is so little address space available there is not much chance of anyone taking your customers away. Your bigger customers may not want to renumber anyway. But if this is a genuine concern to lots of resource holders, why not add a clause to the SSA forbidding members from direct marketing other member's customers? I see no benefits and lots of downsides to dumping assignments. cheers denis co-chair DB-WG > > We would like to check what the community thinks about this plan and if there > is enough positive feedback we would like to make a concept proposal from it > and present this at RIPE86. > > Kind regards, > > Jeroen > -- > > To unsubscribe from this mailing list, get a password reminder, or change > your subscription options, please visit: > https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/address-policy-wg -- To unsubscribe from this mailing list, get a password reminder, or change your subscription options, please visit: https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/address-policy-wg
