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] Use of the Reserved IP Pool
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Use of the Reserved IP Pool
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Use of the Reserved IP Pool
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Dpto. Datos Television Costa Blanca
datos at tvt-datos.es
Wed Jul 2 11:10:35 CEST 2014
El 02/07/2014 10:56, Richard Hartmann escribió: > On Wed, Jul 2, 2014 at 10:47 AM, Dpto. Datos Television Costa Blanca > <datos at tvt-datos.es> wrote: >> Should be use the Available IP Pool >> (http://www.ripe.net/internet-coordination/ipv4-exhaustion/ipv4-available-pool-graph), >> what is near to a /8 (0.93 /8) to those new LIRs that only have a /22 IPv4 >> allocation for another /22 (or other prefix)??? > While I can see where you are coming from, this would open the door > for perpetual "this is the last time, promise!" situations. If this > was accepted policy, time passed, and addresses were used up, what > would happen with all new LIRs which only have one /21? After the next > upgrade, what would happen with those which only have one /20? > > Given the history of those threads, I can not see consensus forming to > undo this change. I really understand what you mean, but take our position (New LIR with only a /22). I have IPv6 deployed on our network, at least half of our customers have Dual-Stack access, the other half dont have IPv6 due to dont have a IPv6 enabled equiptment (most of actual home routers (TPLINK, Conceptronic, etc.) dont support it. Our LIR have 5 stars IPv6, we have reserved from our /22 a /24 for possible transitional mechanism if we run out of IPv4, but since transitional mechanism harm mental health I wish to dont need it. I know opening the door to this could make IPv6 deploy slower, but if one of the requirements to get another /22 (or other prefix) is to have 5 stars plus other ones to ensure the deploy and use of IPv6 it may help on IPv6 deployment. To ensure Im not crazy about asking for that, APNIC is doing something similar http://www.apnic.net/policy/proposals/prop-105 Regards, > > Sorry, > Richard > -- Daniel Baeza Centro de Observación de Red Dpto. Internet y Telefonía Television Costa Blanca S.L. Telf. 966190565 WEB: http://www.tvt.es Correo: datos at tvt-datos.es --AVISO LEGAL-- En cumplimiento de la Ley Orgánica 15/1999, de 13 de diciembre de protección de datos de carácter personal, se pone en conocimiento del destinatario del presente correo electrónico, que los datos incluidos en este mensaje, están dirigidos exclusivamente al citado destinatario cuyo nombre aparece en el encabezamiento, por lo que si usted no es la persona interesada rogamos nos comunique el error de envío y se abstenga de realizar copias del mensaje o de los datos contenidos en el mismo o remitirlo o entregarlo a otra persona, procediendo a borrarlo de inmediato. Asimismo le informamos que sus datos de correo han quedado incluidos en nuestra base de datos a fin de dirigirle, por este medio, comunicaciones comerciales, profesionales e informativas y que usted dispone de los derechos de acceso, rectificación, cancelación y especificación de los mismos, derechos que podrá hacer efectivos dirigiéndose a Televisión Costa Blanca, S.L., C/ San Policarpo 41 Bajo. C.P: 03181 Torrevieja (Alicante).
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Use of the Reserved IP Pool
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Use of the Reserved IP Pool
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]