Greetings! We discussed internally and divided to write our arguments against 2015-01 again in more clear way: 0) Very interesting discussion, people who see bad things in this proposal write arguments and nobody listen to them, but people who say ok - doesn't say anything. Not fair discussion! 1) This proposal is most profitable for RIPE NCC only and will make end users to get IPs harder (not only from new lirs). 2) It doesn't close multi-LIR ability and that's normal. 3) People who says it's very profitable or so are mistaken. In other case everyone can do that and them also, and they would be against this proposal too, but it's not so as you may see. That's not so. New LIRs ability is open for everyone and people (big IP owners) redistribute IPs more easy. And in most cases it's easy and better then open LIRs. So the fact is that new LIRs registration rate is the same as usual. Rate of LIRs is normal: Year Objects IPs %of /8 Rest Rest ip 2012 779 797696 5% 95% 15979520 2013 1836 1880064 12% 83% 14099456 2014 2469 2534400 16% 67% 11565056 2015 1587 1643520 10% 57% 9921536 Total: 6671 6855680 41% 59% 9921536 +RIPE free IPs pool is growing. total was 627 blocks only from 185.x transfered. but total LIRs that get 185 blocks are and total 6671, its 9,3% it's not significant. 3) The proposal should help market and companies to redistribute IPs from the companies who don't need them to companies who needs them. This proposal is against it. Because it may make more difficult possible transfer = rise the market prices and speculations. We know the real situations on the market and understand what's going on. If heads of this discussions and proposal doesn't listen here we bring that up to the internet to show up in future why does that happen and that statistics shows what we told. 4) As conclusion this proposal doesn't help to switch to IPv6. It only helps to pull a cat by the balls. My conclusion: - This proposal will not help redistributing and transfer IPs. And the main reason for us - it will make other transfers harder (but not new LIRs. Not much people need new lirs or small blocks but ability is good. There is already limitation as block size /22. Yuri@Ip4market On 01.07.2015 12:10, Gert Doering wrote:
hi,
On Wed, Jul 01, 2015 at 12:04:59PM +0300, Aleksey Bulgakov wrote:
Whatever we say, you made the decision, and our opinion does not matter. Right?
If anybody supports this proposal *and write +1* his voice will be counted, if don't he should write many arguments.
May be someone doesn't like this text but this is the trooth.
Please read up how the policy development process in the RIPE region works.
We're in Last Call now, which means "any arguments that have been brought up and addressed in discussion and review phase are no longer interesting" (because we consider them to be addressed, and per Sander's summary, have reached rough consensus even if not everybody agrees).
The Last Call phase is specifically there to bring up *new* arguments that have been overlooked before.
Whether *I* agree with you or anyone else has nothing to do with how the PDP works - if the argument is not new, it is not interesting, and just noise on the list. If people insist on creating noise, they will be quietened.
(Note that I'm also totally not interested in "support!" statements in this phase)
Gert Doering -- APWG chair