Re: [address-policy-wg] Idea for aggregating IP addresses

[Sander Steffann]

Hi,

> "non-continuous IPv4 blocks be exchanged for the equivalent size in a single 
> continuous IPv4 block"

I think the problem with this is that it let's spammers exchange dirty blocks 
for clean blocks.

Cheers,
Sander



smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature

Re: [address-policy-wg] Idea for aggregating IP addresses

[Ping IP]

Hello Jörg,

Although I used a /22 and /20 as an example. I deliberately mention IP
addresses, since this idea can be used for IPv4 and IPv6.

Perhaps its too little, too late for IPv4. But it helps one of the goals of
RIPE.

Best regards,

Abdelouahed
Ping IP network

2016-09-22 16:04 GMT+02:00 Jörg Kost :

> Hi,
>
> I like the idealism of this idea, but it is too little, too late and much
> too many work to save a few bytes on the ip4 routing table. This race is
> lost, adding more memory to the board or block and remove certain routes
> will be the solution. My focus shifted already to the future (?)
> disaggregation of ip6, where we had hit the 32k lately.
>
> Jörg
>
>
> On 22 Sep 2016, at 14:37, Ping IP wrote:
>
> Hello,
>>
>> One of the goals of RIPE is to aggregate IP addresses. I'd like to suggest
>> the ability for a LIR and End User to exchange number of blocks of IP
>> ranges for a greater block.
>>
>> For example:
>> LIR/End User has 4 different /22 subnets and LIR/End User can exchange
>> these subnets for 1 x /20 subnet.
>>
>> This gives a LIR or End User the possibility to announce larger IP subnets
>> to the Internet. Helping the goal of aggregating the IP addresses on the
>> Internet.
>>
>> According one of the RIPE trainer, this is currently not possible
>> according
>> the RIPE policy. Because there's no policy to give a LIR/End User this
>> ability.
>>
>> I'm curious to what you think of this idea.
>>
>> Best regards,
>>
>> Abdelouahed
>> Ping IP network
>>
>

Re: [address-policy-wg] Idea for aggregating IP addresses

[Lu Heng]

Hi There:

Although it does sounds good idea consider how big the routing table has
become, but in practice, I guess would be very difficult, as there is no
way to prevent people spam them then return to RIPE NCC for a new one,
plus, with smaller allocation pool every day, the ability RIPE NCC would be
able to practice such policy, would be in a rather limited time, so it will
be a policy only works for---let's say 6 months, longest 2 years.

So I agree with Arash, leave the IPv4 alone, seriously, get IPv6 done so
you don't have to look at the size of IPv4 routing table.

On Fri, Sep 23, 2016 at 6:30 AM, Arash Naderpour <arash_...@parsun.com>
wrote:

>
>
> Soon or late it will end up here to “IPv4 is DEAD, go and develop IPv6”,
> that’s a regular answer here when you bring up something related to IPv4 J
>
>
>
> Your idea looks like a disk defragmentation procedure, but first you need
> to check how many percent it is defragmented and how much free space you
> will need to do the procedure.
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
>
>
> Arash
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* address-policy-wg [mailto:address-policy-wg-boun...@ripe.net] *On
> Behalf Of *Ping IP
> *Sent:* Thursday, 22 September 2016 10:37 PM
> *To:* address-policy-wg@ripe.net
> *Subject:* [address-policy-wg] Idea for aggregating IP addresses
>
>
>
> Hello,
>
>
>
> One of the goals of RIPE is to aggregate IP addresses. I'd like to suggest
> the ability for a LIR and End User to exchange number of blocks of IP
> ranges for a greater block.
>
>
>
> For example:
>
> LIR/End User has 4 different /22 subnets and LIR/End User can exchange
> these subnets for 1 x /20 subnet.
>
>
>
> This gives a LIR or End User the possibility to announce larger IP subnets
> to the Internet. Helping the goal of aggregating the IP addresses on the
> Internet.
>
>
>
> According one of the RIPE trainer, this is currently not possible
> according the RIPE policy. Because there's no policy to give a LIR/End User
> this ability.
>
>
>
> I'm curious to what you think of this idea.
>
>
>
> Best regards,
>
>
>
> Abdelouahed
>
> Ping IP network
>



-- 
--
Kind regards.
Lu

Re: [address-policy-wg] Idea for aggregating IP addresses

[Arash Naderpour]

 

Soon or late it will end up here to “IPv4 is DEAD, go and develop IPv6”, that’s 
a regular answer here when you bring up something related to IPv4 J

 

Your idea looks like a disk defragmentation procedure, but first you need to 
check how many percent it is defragmented and how much free space you will need 
to do the procedure.

 

Regards,

 

Arash

 

 

 

 

From: address-policy-wg [mailto:address-policy-wg-boun...@ripe.net] On Behalf 
Of Ping IP
Sent: Thursday, 22 September 2016 10:37 PM
To: address-policy-wg@ripe.net
Subject: [address-policy-wg] Idea for aggregating IP addresses

 

Hello,

 

One of the goals of RIPE is to aggregate IP addresses. I'd like to suggest the 
ability for a LIR and End User to exchange number of blocks of IP ranges for a 
greater block.

 

For example:

LIR/End User has 4 different /22 subnets and LIR/End User can exchange these 
subnets for 1 x /20 subnet.

 

This gives a LIR or End User the possibility to announce larger IP subnets to 
the Internet. Helping the goal of aggregating the IP addresses on the Internet.

 

According one of the RIPE trainer, this is currently not possible according the 
RIPE policy. Because there's no policy to give a LIR/End User this ability.

 

I'm curious to what you think of this idea.

 

Best regards,

 

Abdelouahed

Ping IP network

Re: [address-policy-wg] Idea for aggregating IP addresses

[Peter Hessler]

Hi

Clarification question.

Are you requesting that non-continuous IPv4 blocks be exchanged for the
equivalent size in a single continuous IPv4 block that does not match the
previously issued IPv4 addresses, or do you want to take continuous IPv4
blocks and combine them?


On 2016 Sep 22 (Thu) at 14:37:25 +0200 (+0200), Ping IP wrote:
:Hello,
:
:One of the goals of RIPE is to aggregate IP addresses. I'd like to suggest
:the ability for a LIR and End User to exchange number of blocks of IP
:ranges for a greater block.
:
:For example:
:LIR/End User has 4 different /22 subnets and LIR/End User can exchange
:these subnets for 1 x /20 subnet.
:
:This gives a LIR or End User the possibility to announce larger IP subnets
:to the Internet. Helping the goal of aggregating the IP addresses on the
:Internet.
:
:According one of the RIPE trainer, this is currently not possible according
:the RIPE policy. Because there's no policy to give a LIR/End User this
:ability.
:
:I'm curious to what you think of this idea.
:
:Best regards,
:
:Abdelouahed
:Ping IP network

-- 
People will accept your ideas much more readily if you tell them that
Benjamin Franklin said it first.

Re: [address-policy-wg] Idea for aggregating IP addresses

[Garry Glendown]

Guten Tag,
> Hello,
>
> One of the goals of RIPE is to aggregate IP addresses. I'd like to
> suggest the ability for a LIR and End User to exchange number of
> blocks of IP ranges for a greater block.
>
> For example:
> LIR/End User has 4 different /22 subnets and LIR/End User can exchange
> these subnets for 1 x /20 subnet.
>
> This gives a LIR or End User the possibility to announce larger IP
> subnets to the Internet. Helping the goal of aggregating the IP
> addresses on the Internet.
>
> According one of the RIPE trainer, this is currently not possible
> according the RIPE policy. Because there's no policy to give a LIR/End
> User this ability.
>
> I'm curious to what you think of this idea.
Good idea, but judging from the increased trend to de-aggregation of
existing subnets in order to allow multi-homing of PA-subnets, I doubt
that there'll be many people interested, given the (usually) necessary
work that has to be put into renumbering ... while going against the
trend with this suggestion might be nice for the overall community by
saving some memory on all of our routers, the advantage for the ISP or
person returning multiple subnets for a larger one is (usually) rather
small ... if, of course, RIPE would incentivize by - e.g. - returning a
/21 for 6 /24's, I guess some people might be interested ;) But then
people not that "lucky" to have multiple small PAs would complain, as
would (rightfully so) the ones interested in conserving IP addresses ;)

Also, isn't there some provision already for LIRs to be able to return
subnets for a another?

Regards, Garry

Re: [address-policy-wg] Idea for aggregating IP addresses

[Mozafary Mohammad]

Hello

The suggestion help IP broker to made bigger IP block and earn more 
money. bigger IP block is more expensive than smaller one. :)


Also why RIPE NCC should return "Spam dirty" IP range and assign new one 
to a user?


Thanks


On 9/22/2016 4:07 PM, Ping IP wrote:

Hello,

One of the goals of RIPE is to aggregate IP addresses. I'd like to 
suggest the ability for a LIR and End User to exchange number of 
blocks of IP ranges for a greater block.


For example:
LIR/End User has 4 different /22 subnets and LIR/End User can exchange 
these subnets for 1 x /20 subnet.


This gives a LIR or End User the possibility to announce larger IP 
subnets to the Internet. Helping the goal of aggregating the IP 
addresses on the Internet.


According one of the RIPE trainer, this is currently not possible 
according the RIPE policy. Because there's no policy to give a LIR/End 
User this ability.


I'm curious to what you think of this idea.

Best regards,

Abdelouahed
Ping IP network

[address-policy-wg] Idea for aggregating IP addresses

[Ping IP]

Hello,

One of the goals of RIPE is to aggregate IP addresses. I'd like to suggest
the ability for a LIR and End User to exchange number of blocks of IP
ranges for a greater block.

For example:
LIR/End User has 4 different /22 subnets and LIR/End User can exchange
these subnets for 1 x /20 subnet.

This gives a LIR or End User the possibility to announce larger IP subnets
to the Internet. Helping the goal of aggregating the IP addresses on the
Internet.

According one of the RIPE trainer, this is currently not possible according
the RIPE policy. Because there's no policy to give a LIR/End User this
ability.

I'm curious to what you think of this idea.

Best regards,

Abdelouahed
Ping IP network