[70310] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Corporations becoming a LIR
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Tom Vest)
Fri May 7 20:50:37 2004
In-Reply-To: <359C72A8-9FF4-11D8-B09D-000A95DAB530@ripe.net>
Cc: <nanog@trapdoor.merit.edu>, "Drumm, Dan" <ddrumm@ball.com>
From: Tom Vest <tvest@eyeconomics.com>
Date: Fri, 7 May 2004 20:50:09 -0400
To: leo vegoda <leo@ripe.net>
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
Hi Leo,
I find the information under the individual LIR entries interesting.=20
For example, I looked under CN (China) and found 14 European LIRs. I=20
couldn't find any explanation for the "serviced areas" field in the LIR=20=
refbook -- what exactly does it mean? In this particular case, it could=20=
not mean that the entities are providing IR services to Chinese=20
operators for local production needs. Nor would it be possible for=20
these entities to provide IR services to non-Chinese operators for=20
local use, with the (still unlikely I think) exception of the LIRs' own=20=
internal enterprise networks (e.g., Siemens provisioning its own CN=20
corporate network). Could they be servicing Chinese network operators=20
seeking to break into Europe? No such operators exist, except perhaps=20
the few telcos that are already APNIC members and handle their own=20
needs.
Maybe the "serviced areas" field is simply one of those questions that=20=
means "whatever the applicant thinks it means," i.e., it's technically=20=
meaningless (each respondent would have to independently translate it=20
into terms that are meaningful to others)? Some clarification here=20
would be much appreciated!
Tom
On May 7, 2004, at 3:00 AM, leo vegoda wrote:
>
> Hi Dan,
>
> On May 7, 2004, at 12:02 am, Drumm, Dan wrote:
>
> [...]
>
>> We now have a European division, Ball-Europe=20
>> (http://www.ball-europe.com). They have RFC 1918 addressing=20
>> internally, and have the usual problems with NAT and overload=20
>> addressing.
>>
>> I=92m starting the process of filling out an application to register=20=
>> the company, based in Ratingen, DE with RIPE as a Local Internet=20
>> Registry (LIR) so that we can request a /18 (or /17 if we can get=20
>> one) for the 40 some production facilities of Ball-Europe, each of=20
>> which will come across a VPN network and be presented in one block to=20=
>> the ISP uplinks.
>>
>> I was wondering, basically, if I have any chance at this? While RIPE=20=
>> clearly states the admission policy is open to any organization, in=20=
>> order to get PIR (Provider Independent routing) being a RIPE NCC is=20=
>> required, and I don=92t know if a corporation would have a shot.=20
>> Currently, we are not an ARIN member, but hold the Class B.
>
> There's no problem with you becoming and LIR and requesting address=20
> space from us. Membership is open to everyone and we'll be happy to=20
> help you out. If you want to discuss anything then let me know and we=20=
> can have a chat on the telephone.
>
>> The corporation exists in 6 EU nations, and I can demonstrate the=20
>> requirement for >2048 individual IP addresses.
>
> In fact, the RIPE community removed the requirement to demonstrate=20
> usage of existing address space when it lowered the minimum allocation=20=
> to /21. We expect to update the IPv4 policy document when the two=20
> policies in Last Call status have reached consensus (or not) from our=20=
> community.
>
> Best regards,
>
> --=20
> leo vegoda
> Registration Services Manager
> RIPE NCC
>
