This archive is retained to ensure existing URLs remain functional. It will not contain any emails sent to this mailing list after July 1, 2024. For all messages, including those sent before and after this date, please visit the new location of the archive at https://mailman.ripe.net/archives/list/[email protected]/
[address-policy-wg] 2007-08 New Policy Proposal (Enabling Methods for Reallocation of IPv4 Resources)
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2007-08 New Policy Proposal (Enabling Methods for Reallocation of IPv4 Resources)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2007-08 New Policy Proposal (Enabling Methods for Reallocation of IPv4 Resources)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Jeroen Massar
jeroen at unfix.org
Wed Oct 31 10:28:44 CET 2007
Per Heldal wrote: > On Wed, 2007-10-31 at 01:45 +0000, Jeroen Massar wrote: > > Some consider the internet a "virtual society". From that angle it can > also be considered fair that the society's laws and regulations to > evolve over time. From this perspective legacy-holders have had the > opportunity to take part in the process and shouldn't be allowed to > ignore it with no consequences. Today it seems much like everyone makes > their own rules, or that there are no rules. Either way that is anarchy. > What we really need to ask ourselves in the long term is if that is > really what we want (considering the perpetual exceptions for > legacy-holders that have been suggested in v6 space). Those 'perpetual exceptions' should of course never happen. Note that the only people/companies/organizations who where arguing for that where the holders of the so-called class B space who simply don't want to contribute back to the RIR process and indeed don't want to be part of the community, they just want everything for free and they think they are special. Fortunately these where only a few loud voices and the RIR community has decided against them. In the ARIN region one can get /48 PI IPv6 which solves their problem. Looking at the IPv6 allocations list quite a number of the 'legacy space holders' have already gone through the LIR process with the RIR in their area and have received an allocation through that way. As such, I think/hope that the rest of them will nicely follow suit and this will not become an issue. Forcing those existing legacy holders to come into the RIR process though is a definitive no-no IMHO. Greets, Jeroen -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 311 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: </ripe/mail/archives/address-policy-wg/attachments/20071031/440f54d3/attachment.sig>
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2007-08 New Policy Proposal (Enabling Methods for Reallocation of IPv4 Resources)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2007-08 New Policy Proposal (Enabling Methods for Reallocation of IPv4 Resources)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]