NAIPR Message

Rebuttal to Mr. Weisberg's insinuations

Hello Jim,

 * For example, recently InterNIC, APNIC and RIPE were
 * all given new /8 allocations at the same time. Where was
 * the public discussion of why these three registries were
 * given these resources ? Also, people claim that the
 * regional registries like APNIC have to apply and justify
 * just like anyone else. It seems odd that ALL THREE
 * would simultaneously need new /8s, and just when the
 * DOJ and the FTC started to investigate these matters.

All information concerning assignments from the /8's held by RIPE-NCC
are publicly available in our database (

The /8's allocated by the NCC to it's registries are 193/8, 194/8,
195/8 and 62/8. This for the Regional registries through Europe,
Skandanavia, Russia, The middle east and northern Africa.

We do sometime take the liberty of assuming our registries don't
want us to run out of addresses that we can further allocate to
them for their customers use. I have not yet heard of a registry 
complaining about this.

Our membership are regularly informed at RIPE meetings when we need
or have obtained new address blocks. The RIPE-NCC is an open organisation.
We publish all documents and information publicly so if you want to
take the time to do your home work you can find most information.

Obviously information pertaining to our registries customers networks
and the plans etc for their networks is not available.

Why would APNIC or RIPE-NCC make decisions based on acts by the
American Department of Justice or the FTC? The InterNET is not
America. In fact there are rumours circulating that some of us outside
the USA even have connections to it:-)

I can assure you that the reason the RIPE-NCC requested more space,
and got it, was because it was needed to continue allocating addresses
to our registries. 

Kind regards,

John Crain
These are my personal opinions, they do not necessarily reflect those
of my employees and the organisation for which I work.