[address-policy-wg] A comment on 2008-03 & 2007-09

My comment was in the sense of comparing the 
scenario with the policy approved vs. the scenario without this policy.
Of course, it is not the end of the discussion, 
if the policy is approved, many things will have to continue being discussed.

BTW, the policy passed in LACNIC region in this 
meeting and now it will go through the last call 
for commetns and ratification process.

Raúl


At 03:19 p.m. 30/05/2008, David Conrad wrote:
>On May 30, 2008, at 11:11 AM, Raul Echeberria wrote:
>>>Suppose we fast forward to ~2011 and you've just been rejected by
>>>RIPE- NCC because they have no more address space to hand out whereas
>>>AfriNIC and LACNIC both have (at least) a full /8.
>>>
>>>I'm curious: what do you think is going to happen?
>>
>>David:
>>
>>I am curious about other situation.
>>Suppose that IANA  allocates the last 2 /8s to the RIR A and one day
>>later IANA receives a request from the RIR B that is running out of
>>IPv4 addresses while the RIR A has (at least) 2 /8s.
>>
>>What do you think is going to happen?
>
>My understanding of the current policy regime is that IANA only
>allocates unused addresses.  With the allocation of the last /8, IANA
>would be out of the IPv4 business.  As such, it would be up to the
>RIRs involved to negotiate some "fair" solution (if any).
>
>Regards,
>-drc
>
>
>--
>No virus found in this incoming message.
>Checked by AVG. Version: 7.5.524 / Virus 
>Database: 269.24.4/1474 - Release Date: 30/05/2008 07:44 a.m.