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] The final /8 policy proposals, part 3
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] The final /8 policy proposals, part 3
- Next message (by thread): AW: [address-policy-wg] The final /8 policy proposals, part 3
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Jim Reid
jim at rfc1035.com
Tue Aug 25 17:07:57 CEST 2009
On 25 Aug 2009, at 15:37, <michael.dillon at bt.com> wrote: > That is why I would like to see a decision based on run-rates > in the future, when those run-rates are known to everyone. EH? You said earlier that no-one has a crystal ball. So predictions of future run-rates are just that: predictions. A policy based on those predictions therefore makes no sense. We might as well be developing policies based on the number of unicorns each LIR has. Or says they plan to have when the last /8 leaves IANA. Anyway, let's get back to the original poster's point. What use is a policy developed today based on we *think* future run-rates will be. What's the point of that when the actual run rates at the point when this policy took effect would almost certainly be different from those predictions? What is there to be gained from such a policy? What would such a policy achieve that the current policy doesn't?
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] The final /8 policy proposals, part 3
- Next message (by thread): AW: [address-policy-wg] The final /8 policy proposals, part 3
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]