[address-policy-wg] "needs", last /8, ... (Was: Transfer Requirements for IPv4 Allocations)

On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 05:16:31PM +0200, Radu-Adrian FEURDEAN wrote:
>> So apart from a few people, most of us agree that any attempt at changing
>> policy in the more liberal direction is doomed to fail miserably.
>
>Again, *more* liberal, does not mean *most* liberal. There's a huge gap
>between the policies in force 13/09/2012 and before and the ones in
>force 14/09/2012 and after. This what I would like to see fixed.
>Could any of you have your company survive with only a /22 (and 10-15
>$/IP extra, 256/512/1024 packs towards 15$/IP) ?
>
If the community expended half as much effort on deploying IPv6
as it does on rationing the remaining shreds of ipv4, this
problem wouldn't exist.

rgds,
Sascha Luck