<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<p>Dear Arash,<br>
<br>
Thank you for your question.<br>
<br>
At the moment, we see 98 members with 10 or more LIR accounts.
These members have received a total of 1254 /24s under the current
IPv4 waiting list policy.<br>
<br>
I would like to note that these numbers are constantly changing.
On the one hand, some members continue to open additional LIR
accounts, while other members consolidate or close many LIR
accounts as soon as the 24-month holding period expires. This also
explains the slight difference from the previously published
numbers. Several members that held 10 or more accounts when they
received /24s have since reduced their number of LIRs.<br>
<br>
I hope this answers your question.<br>
<br>
Kind regards,<br>
Marco Schmidt<br>
Assistant Manager Registry Services<br>
RIPE NCC<br>
</p>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 08/12/2021 12:39, Arash Naderpour
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CAGpkpTMzi=_SBVgDvwcjD8D69fxEspM2ELkQqE-CGajd+hN-cA@mail.gmail.com">
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<div dir="ltr">Hi Marco,
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Could you please let me know how many organizations have 10
or more LIR accounts?</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Thanks,</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Arash Naderpour</div>
</div>
<br>
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Tue, Dec 7, 2021 at 8:22 PM
Marco Schmidt <<a href="mailto:mschmidt@ripe.net"
moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">mschmidt@ripe.net</a>>
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px
0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">Dear
colleagues,<br>
<br>
In the Address Policy Working Group sessions at RIPE 83, I
shared our <br>
observations regarding the IPv4 waiting list policy. [1]<br>
<br>
The intent of this policy was to provide newcomers with a
minimal amount <br>
of IPv4 space for as long as possible. However, about half of
these <br>
allocations went to members that received several /24
allocations via <br>
multiple LIR accounts.<br>
<br>
As there was interest in reviewing the policy at the RIPE
Meeting, I <br>
would like to provide more detail on the provision of IPv4
allocations <br>
over the last two years and the current situation with the
waiting list.<br>
<br>
In the last 24 months, we provided 4,178 LIRs with a /24
allocation:<br>
- 2,019 allocations (48%) went to members with a single LIR
account<br>
- 452 allocations (11%) went to members with 2-4 LIR
accounts<br>
- 298 allocations (7%) went to members with 5-9 LIR
accounts and<br>
- 1,409 allocations (34%) went to members with 10 or more
LIR <br>
accounts (up to 33 /24 allocations to a single member)<br>
<br>
This trend towards allocations to multiple LIR accounts has
accelerated <br>
in the past six months. Between June and November 2021, only
24% of <br>
allocations went to members with a single LIR account, while
54% went to <br>
members with 10 or more accounts.<br>
<br>
We see the same trend with the current waiting list. At the
time of <br>
writing, we can see 327 requests for a /24 allocation:<br>
- 83 (25%) are from members with a single LIR account<br>
- 42 (13%) are from members with 2-4 LIRs accounts<br>
- 45 (14%) are from members with 5-9 LIR accounts<br>
- 157 (48%) are from members with 10 or more LIR accounts<br>
<br>
Consequently, there is a significantly longer wait time for
members with <br>
a single LIR account.<br>
<br>
Looking at the current market prices for IPv4 in comparison to
our <br>
membership fees, even a wait time of several months is
acceptable for <br>
organisations that plan to transfer their allocation after the
end of <br>
the holding period. Conversely, the long wait time will create
<br>
uncertainty for real newcomers, especially if they can’t rely
on <br>
IPv6-only networks.<br>
<br>
I hope the WG finds this information useful for further
discussion. If <br>
there is consensus to change the current situation, there are
several <br>
approaches available – including a review of the waiting list
policy and <br>
changing ‘per LIR’ to something else. Other approaches, such
as a <br>
different charging scheme or changing the concept of multiple
LIRs would <br>
need to be approved by the RIPE NCC membership.<br>
<br>
Kind regards,<br>
Marco Schmidt<br>
Assistant Manager Registry Services<br>
RIPE NCC<br>
<br>
[1] <a href="https://ripe83.ripe.net/archives/video/642/"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">https://ripe83.ripe.net/archives/video/642/</a><br>
<br>
<br>
-- <br>
<br>
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, get a password
reminder, or change your subscription options, please visit: <a
href="https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/address-policy-wg"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/address-policy-wg</a><br>
</blockquote>
</div>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>