09:58 < ElvisVelea-V4Escrow> unfortunately, cox here only offers v4
10:00 < ElvisVelea-V4Escrow> repeating the comment made before the break:
10:01 < ElvisVelea-V4Escrow> As a response to Wilfried, the price tag the RIPE Chair talked about is not the price for becoming an LIR or anything that can be decided at the AGM, it's the price of the IPs in the marketplace that is slowing down or killing the business of the small LIRs that joined after 2012 and only have one /22
10:02 < ElvisVelea-V4Escrow> while I agree that it is not a bad idea to hold on to the IP space for as long as possible, by doing so we are actually creating a situation where for many years to come the incentive (no more IPv4) to move to IPv6 will be ignored by many while the thousands of new members will have to struggle with only one /22. that is why I initially believed that allowing a second /22 would help (with the risk of depleting the last /8 pool faster)
10:06 < ElvisVelea-V4Escrow> those new members, unfortunately, do not voice their opinion on the mailing list, but I am sure that the board and the NCC staff have met them numerous times at the meetings and trainings in the region. we as a broker also see them often coming to us and running away when they find out what is the price per IP for a small IPv4 block. that is when we recommend them to either request a second /22 on a sister/brother company or just ope
10:06 < ElvisVelea-V4Escrow> n a second LIR on the same company name (even though that is like 'cheating')
10:06 < ElvisVelea-V4Escrow> ow, I will repeat the comments when we get to this item of the agenda again 🙂
10:09 < ripe359> The presentation "Romania's Jump to 1st Place as Exporter of IPs" has started
10:24 < ElvisVelea-V4Escrow> hey menno
10:25 < ElvisVelea-V4Escrow> are you around? I still have some problems with the stream 🙂
10:25 < Azi-47720> 'tis very hacky this morning
10:27 < sandrab_ripencc> The presenter has asked for questions. If you have any question please state your name and affiliation and I will go to the mic to read it on your behalf.
10:29 < sandrab_ripencc> The previous presentation has ended. Ingrid Wijte is now presenting on "Feedback from NCC Registration Services"
10:30 < ElvisVelea-V4Escrow> congrats to Andrea! a baby boy.. that's great!!!
10:30 < sandrab_ripencc> Thank you Elvis. We'll pass it on to him 🙂
10:35 < sandrab_ripencc> Any comments and questions on the topic Ingrid has just presented?
10:44 < ElvisVelea-V4Escrow> as a comment to what Erik is saying: Even the RIPE NCC template for the End-User independent assignment contract says that the LIR can change the terms of the contract (by updating them on their own website)... he's talking about stuff that he has heard from some very upset customers, and maybe not really the truth
10:44 < sandrab_ripencc> I will read it for you
10:44 < ElvisVelea-V4Escrow> thank you sandra
10:55 < sandrab_ripencc> Ingrid is continuing her presentation on Allocated PI and allocated unspecified
10:55 < ElvisVelea-V4Escrow> still haven't managed to talk to anyone from ops regarding the stream
10:56 < sandrab_ripencc> I will let them know
10:56 < ElvisVelea-V4Escrow> is there anyone from the NCC following the chat that could ask an opsie to contact me? I have been trying to talk to one since 9AM (bucharest time)
10:56 < ElvisVelea-V4Escrow> thanks sandra
10:57 < sandrab_ripencc> It's busy here and OPS already knows about it. They will get in touch as soon as possible. Thanks Elvis.
10:57 < ElvisVelea-V4Escrow> ok 🙂
10:59 < ElvisVelea-V4Escrow> a comment to Ingrid's presentation: as a customer, I could not see a difference between ASSIGNED PI (made by the RIPE NCC via an LIR) and ASSIGNED PI (made by the LIR)... I would think that end-users that have ASSIGNED PI and want to move from an (other) Sponsoring LIR, they should be able to do it, just like with PI from the RIPE NCC
10:59 < sandrab_ripencc> I will read it after she finishes this part. is that OK?
11:01 < stolpe> why would that be?
11:02 < sandrab_ripencc> Stolpe, is that a specific question for Ingrid?
11:02 < Azi-47720> Of course they are able to, that's the raison d'etre for PI. Is anyone proposing to chnge that?
11:02 < stolpe> that was for elvis
11:02 < stolpe> sorry
11:02 < stolpe> not whent it's allocated pi
11:02 < sandrab_ripencc> Azi, is that a question for Ingrid?
11:02 < stolpe> different flavour
11:03 < Azi-47720> sandrab_ripencc: no, it was a comment on Elvis's question
11:03 < sandrab_ripencc> Thank you for clarifying
11:03 < ElvisVelea-V4Escrow> stolpe, allocated pi is a different flavour
11:04 < sandrab_ripencc> Elvis, I will read your comment now
11:05 < ElvisVelea-V4Escrow> being able to move the assigned PI from an LIR that has an ALLOCATED PI to an other Sponsoring LIR will de-aggregate the allocated PI block and the LIRs may not accept
11:09 < sandrab_ripencc> I forgot to mention that Ingrid has asqued for questions and comments. If you have any other questions, please write them down and I will read it for you
11:09 < sandrab_ripencc> asked, sorry 🙂
11:10 < ElvisVelea-V4Escrow> as far as I know, with PI assignments made in the very old ages, the LIR would request an approval from the RIPE NCC for the PI assignment to the customer... the decission of whether the PI block would come from the RIPE NCC or the LIR was not transparent to the customer
11:10 < sandrab_ripencc> Would you like to me to mention that on the mic?
11:10 < ElvisVelea-V4Escrow> the customer has received a PI and he should be able to move it anywhere, I do not think that the NCC's interpretation is correct
11:10 < ElvisVelea-V4Escrow> yes, please. both are part of the same comment
11:11 < sandrab_ripencc> Ok. Thanks.
11:15 < Azi-47720> it's perhaps a question of dealing in good faith. the customer gets "PI space"
11:15 < Azi-47720> they don't know that it came from a block that isn't "real" PI
11:15 < razvan_ripencc> ElvisVelea-V4Escrow: Sjoerd is in contact with you and we checked the stream. The streaming point is in AMS so the stream we are watching here does a roundtrip BUH - AMS - BUH and does not stutter. I will ask someone from the RIPE NCC office in AMS to check connectivity from there, but please understand there is nothing the OPS team at RIPE 71 can do about this
11:15 < Azi-47720> does ALLOCATED PI exist in ipv6?
11:16 < Azi-47720> because if it doesn't, why bother with it
11:16 < prt-8676> razvan_ripencc: As another datapoint, I am receiving the stream OK in the UK.
11:17 < ElvisVelea-V4Escrow> the solution, as I see it would be that: PI assignment holders can sign a contract with a Sponsoring LIR (could be the same LIR) and keep it as PI. IP space that is not registered as ASSIGNED PI, could be de-aggregated and changed into ALLOCATED PA or ASSIGNED PI (to the LIR).
11:18 < ElvisVelea-V4Escrow> razvan_ripencc, thanks, I understand from sjoerd that you guys have done the best to troubleshoot.. it must be either a transit (C&W) or my provider (COX) problem
11:18 < ElvisVelea-V4Escrow> I'll have to accept that I am losing about 10-15 seconds every few minutes and there's nothing I can do
11:19 < ElvisVelea-V4Escrow> sandrab_ripencc, the comment regarding the solution should be read at the mic, please
11:19 < Azi-47720> hmm, 1273 had an issue last night and their traffic has been very low since
11:19 < Azi-47720> (they're one of my transits)
11:19 < sandrab_ripencc> ah ok
11:19 < sandrab_ripencc> missed that . I apologise. Was queuing.
11:20 < ElvisVelea-V4Escrow> 🙂
11:21 < sandrab_ripencc> Done. Thank you 🙂
11:24 < ElvisVelea-V4Escrow> thanks a lot sandra 🙂
11:24 < sandrab_ripencc> You are welcome
11:24 < sandrab_ripencc> Ingrid has ended her presentation
11:25 < ElvisVelea-V4Escrow> rounding up the 'affected' entities would mean rounding up the end-users as well (the ones that have received the assignments) - otherwise, you would only talking to one side of the story
11:25 < ElvisVelea-V4Escrow> heh, it's ok 🙂
11:25 < ElvisVelea-V4Escrow> we'll see how that works
11:25 < stolpe> why is this so important for you elvis?
11:25 < ElvisVelea-V4Escrow> stolpe, I have no interest in it, I do like things to be done the right way, though
11:26 < sandrab_ripencc> There is 5 minutes left for discussion. If you have any comments or questions, please write them down.
11:26 < ElvisVelea-V4Escrow> I do not hold either of the resources
11:26 < stolpe> well, it is compicated
11:26 < stolpe> complicated
11:26 < ElvisVelea-V4Escrow> I will repeat the comments made earlier, once the session started:
11:26 < stolpe> but as gert said, it is confusinge labeling "assigned pi" when it is different
11:27 < ElvisVelea-V4Escrow> [01H:01M:08S] <ElvisVelea-V4Escrow> As a response to Wilfried, the price tag the RIPE Chair talked about is not the price for becoming an LIR or anything that can be decided at the AGM, it's the price of the IPs in the marketplace that is slowing down or killing the business of the small LIRs that joined after 2012 and only have one /22
11:27 < stolpe> allocated pi was just picked because it sort of described the way it worked best
11:27 < ElvisVelea-V4Escrow> [01H:02M:38S] <ElvisVelea-V4Escrow> while I agree that it is not a bad idea to hold on to the IP space for as long as possible, by doing so we are actually creating a situation where for many years to come the incentive (no more IPv4) to move to IPv6 will be ignored by many while the thousands of new members will have to struggle with only one /22. that is why I initially believed that allowing a second /22 would help (with the risk
11:27 < ElvisVelea-V4Escrow> of depleting the last /8 pool faster)
11:27 < ElvisVelea-V4Escrow> [01H:06M:00S] <ElvisVelea-V4Escrow> those new members, unfortunately, do not voice their opinion on the mailing list, but I am sure that the board and the NCC staff have met them numerous times at the meetings and trainings in the region. we as a broker also see them often coming to us and running away when they find out what is the price per IP for a small IPv4 block. that is when we recommend them to either request a second /22 on
11:27 < ElvisVelea-V4Escrow> a sister/brother company or just ope
11:27 < ElvisVelea-V4Escrow> [01H:06M:00S] <ElvisVelea-V4Escrow> n a second LIR on the same company name (even though that is like 'cheating')
11:28 < ElvisVelea-V4Escrow> sory for the long stuff 😉
11:28 < sandrab_ripencc> I believe you are answering Stolpe and I should not read this, right?
11:28 < ElvisVelea-V4Escrow> no, you should read all of that
11:28 < ElvisVelea-V4Escrow> 🙂
11:29 < stolpe> sorry, yes that was a different discussion
11:29 < ElvisVelea-V4Escrow> those are comments to the discussion
11:29 < sandrab_ripencc> ah lol ok. Next time please state my name at the beginning so it's clear for me 🙂
11:29 < ElvisVelea-V4Escrow> right 🙂
11:30 < sandrab_ripencc> thanks
11:31 < Azi-47720> I would love to accelerate ipv4 runout if only to not have to listen to this sort of discussion anymore
11:33 < prt-8676> We were just saying something similar here in the office 🙂
11:38 < sandrab_ripencc> Any last comments?
11:38 < sandrab_ripencc> AOB
11:39 < sandrab_ripencc> this session has ended
