[address-policy-wg] Transfer Requirements for IPv4 Allocations

Hi,

On Thu, Apr 23, 2015 at 03:07:54PM +0300, Vladimir Andreev wrote:
> In my opinion any change to policy should reflect expectation of community as a whole.

"Rough consensus" does not mean *everybody* has to agree.

> Current propose doesn't change anything to the direction of improvement for community.

Oh, to the contrary - ensuring that allocations from the last /8 are
not burnt like crazy (by permitting arbitrary fast trading) might not
be something good for you personally, but for the *rest* of the community,
it might be actually a good thing (depending on whether or not you
believe in the rationale for the last /8 policy).

The last /8 is not there to do "business as usual, based on IPv4" - it
is there to enable *new* market entrants to run a few critical things
with IPv4, while the main deployment has to happen on IPv6.

Gert Doering
        -- APWG chair
-- 
have you enabled IPv6 on something today...?

SpaceNet AG                        Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard
Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14          Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann
D-80807 Muenchen                   HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen)
Tel: +49 (0)89/32356-444           USt-IdNr.: DE813185279
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 811 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: </ripe/mail/archives/address-policy-wg/attachments/20150423/20f06bcd/attachment.sig>