Policy Statement on Address Space Allocations

Just to spend a few minutes thinking about it, what do the phone
companies do ? They are the nearest thing with a large installed base
that the Internet even begins to map onto. There are however some
fundemental differences - primarily the fragmentation of Europe (which
is not the case in the US).

We have a 2Mb line from London to Amsterdam which costs us very much
the same as a T1 from London to Washington. As I understand it, this
"milk them for all they are worth" pricing of the telcos applies to
cross-border land lines in Europe also.

All this impacts very severely on the commercial decisions taken as to
the routeing of traffic. I would much rather buy more lines to the US
and let the traffics flow back to Europe then to just buy lines to
Europe. Luckily, commercial concerns are not the only contraints
within which we have to work.

What this has to do with RIPE allocation policies is beyond
me. Everyone in the European realm suffers from extremely high
tariffs. So what?

To wash some dirty laundry here, we as a provider have been trying to
get new address space for our dial up customers from RIPE NCC for almost 6
months now. We allocate *each* dialup customer *1* IP address from a
block and dynamically route them based on where they log in to the
service (including RSN Amsterdam). The RIPE NCC has >effectively< refused
us space because they believe that we should change the product we
sell and use dynamic IP for dialups.

We are the largest dialup ISP in Europe. We are not the largest provider
in Europe because we follow the rest of the ISPs like sheep, buying Ciscos
and installing off the shelf terminal servers. We provide a product which
our customers understand gives them *more* for their money. We do something
different, and the customers like it. Tough fact of business life that.

You and hundreds of other companies approach RIPE with the same
story of how big they are, how large their investors are, how
their network is gonna take the world of the Internet by storm,
and therefore they deserve a /16 or even a /15. If RIPE followed
your logic, there would be no more address space left.

Use dynamic IP like the rest of us. We all realize the drain of
IP addresses and try our best to maximize the addresses. Why
should you be different?

But this is all I have seen you do, therefore, how can I but believe
that this is the case. Every private mail that has been sent to us as
a company involves you acting as God and us as the grovelling peasants
praying for a benidication of address space. I have all these mails
in my various folders, as do you.

It all depends on your ego. You could just look at them as
an organization assigned the tough role of making sure there
are IP addresses available in 1999. You see it as God. A viewpoint
based on your world view.

Why not. We are not a communist society are we ? Each individual member
of RIPE have their own unique requirements in a commercial and
academically challenging world. We have a USP (Unique Selling Point) of
giving our paying customers there own IP address (OK - it is not
unique, but close enough). We have built propretary technology that
allows our users to use *any* of our dial in points and get the same
service, with the same IP number etc etc, and as one of our primary USPs
we cannot allow the RIPE NCC to try to change that.

IBM has 460 POPs in over 40 countries and uses dynamic IP addresses.
I can be in London or NYC or Tel Aviv and still use my SLIP connection
to read my mail wherever I am. Why should you have static IP addresses
for something others can do the dynamic way and thereby conserve
IP address space?

Peter Galbavy peter@demon.net

Hank Nussbacher