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] 2015-05
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2015-05
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2015-05
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Sylvain Vallerot
sylvain.vallerot at opdop.net
Thu Oct 29 15:20:58 CET 2015
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 On 21/10/2015 23:19, Netskin NOC wrote: > The point is to speedup ipv6 adoption of the big ISPs by enforcing > the return of existing ipv4 allocations over the next few years (tbd, > like 10% of the allocated ipv4 space of each LIR per year). As a > minor side effect everyone could get an /21 without any problems > (which most probably wouldn't then be needed anymore anyway). I agree, it is a much better approach that 2015-5 : make the IPv4 dissappear OK but the large LIRs reserves should be drained at the same time. Unfortunately I suspect we lost the power to do so when we adopted the catastrophic "no need" policy, since big LIRs would easily declare fake assignments now to fill and reserve their already routed but yet unsed allocations. We would have to restore needs-based policy first. Best regards, Sylvain -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1 iF4EAREIAAYFAlYyK0oACgkQJBGsD8mtnRHaawD9EH+bBRnGt3xmGh9/pT370qdn hBChWiYaePdb3VZjDiwBAIQPKJD89dYihIG3CiXST4nk0hqHlaRLic2na0R2jRVM =Pyla -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2015-05
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2015-05
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]