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 ]
Andre Keller
ak at list.ak.cx
Wed Jul 2 20:35:48 CEST 2014
Hi, On 02.07.2014 19:53, Dpto. Datos Television Costa Blanca wrote: > As I understood, he said no, he said _nobody_ wants it when at this > time, only 6 ppl replied the thread. Well maybe only 6 people replied to this thread, but the topic was discussed at length when the last /8 policy was developed in the first place. If you look at how for example LACNIC burned through the first half of their last /8, I prefer the policy in place in the RIPE region. The current policy ensures that new entrants get a least a bit of address space to bootstrap. If I understand your proposal correctly, this would mean a lot of LIRs still not getting the resources they need (a /22 does not make a big difference for many LIRs) and new entrants would eventually get no ip addresses at all. I do not see that happening. Regards André
- 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 ]