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] RIPE IPv4 Allocation Policy
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] RIPE IPv4 Allocation Policy
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] RIPE IPv4 Allocation Policy
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Tore Anderson
tore at fud.no
Fri Aug 28 13:55:07 CEST 2015
* SBS - Support <support at sonabusiness.nl> > The RIPE policy of allocating only a PA /22 to new LIR's and not > allocating any further IPv4 resources is highly detrimental to the > growth of new upcoming organisations and protects legacy Telco > operators, what are your thoughts on reviewing this and coming up > with a process to allocate further resources to new LIR's if the need > can be justified. If we hadn't done it that way, we would today not have had IPv4 addresses at all to allocate to new upcoming organisations. None. Zip, zilch, zero. How would that have been any less detrimental? Tore
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] RIPE IPv4 Allocation Policy
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] RIPE IPv4 Allocation Policy
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]