-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 On 10/05/16 13:12, Aled Morris wrote:
I am troubled by the new members joining RIPE purely to obtain IPv4 address space.
I've still never seen any figures to support this, and thus it sounds like FUD to justify some sort of IPv4 ransacking policy each and every time I hear it. Are there any figures to back up the assertion that "crooks" are eating away at 185/8? I don't think I've ever seen any concrete evidence of a widespread problem as yet. It occurs to me that there will always be bad actors as long as we desire the freedom to be able to acquire companies with Memberships and pay only one set of Membership fees. I'm not actually sure if abuse of this system should a problem for the RIPE community, the RIPE NCC, or indeed a problem for the relevant authorities to investigate (i.e. fraud). Despite the possibility for abuse, I so far remain convinced that it's worth keeping 185/8 as a reserved range for new entrants, and indeed keeping any address space returned from the IANA for as long as we can to - hopefully - help continue that policy long into the future. There's nothing in 2015-05 that I find agreeable in this context, particularly if we discount the assertion that abuse of the /8 policy is harming depletion in a meaningful fashion. (P.S. Not to point fingers at you directly, Aled; you're just the last person to mention it in the thread before it changed direction.) - -- Tom Hill Network Engineer Bytemark Hosting http://www.bytemark.co.uk/ tel. +44 1904 890 890 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJXMgN7AAoJEH2fKbrp2sQ6vPAIANOay9s+6KIDi8Tb0fhFedXe 5VcBB10PF9r49jSAcidwKSQ5bJJbqJd/VzIrZMnevPNQw8FZfX+xOlpsebMx4Ezt bfxzGJTO5JZ/ghc4PtCDbvj317dVy6rCftciylpmzHfMEzzpHHC1323NyWHf9/Hp 1EN2Hdjtsz+BVMGHOPfKHIpOAzyeCdXQ1e7HBsGKDhStzM0ygJrXtwBib3BiApc8 KNwyJFGY8Wb39Llb9w5PypXb5L51W71Or6kApcZvhkmTuo25aVS5Tvg/F5eIJ042 EEDdzgkLvN04jJdSZdYNW3VavoPQ1MGx+gtith6JF0YxlKkom2Wccb+QSgh/wcI= =7Yd2 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----