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/address-policy-wg@ripe.net/
[address-policy-wg] The final /8 policy proposals, part 2
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] The final /8 policy proposals, part 2
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] The final /8 policy proposals, part 2
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Masataka Ohta
mohta at necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp
Wed Jul 8 15:46:36 CEST 2009
Gert Doering wrote: > Please stick to the topic of *this* discussion. Even with reclamation > efforts, eventually we will reach the last /8, Why? Assuming reduction of address space consumption by mandating NAT, I can't understand how the last /8 could be reached before IPv4 will be replaced by something not likely to be IPv6. Could you elaborate? > and *this* discussion is > only covering the rules for the last /8. I don't think it off topic to discuss whether there will be the last /8 or not. It is a fair counter argument against a policy proposal on the last /8 to say there won't be the last /8. Masataka Ohta
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] The final /8 policy proposals, part 2
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] The final /8 policy proposals, part 2
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]