[address-policy-wg] 2015-05 Discussion Period extended until 13 May 2016 (Last /8 Allocation Criteria Revision)

Hi,

On Sun, Apr 17, 2016 at 09:52:15AM +0300, Adrian Pitulac wrote:
> I see the same explanation again and again and again. But I see no real 
> argument from you guys. No statistics, no trending, no prediction, just 
> "keep the ipv4 last longer". Can you do better than that?

Marco has provided statistics about the IPv4 pool runout, broken down by
"185" and "other addresses returned".  These show that while the total
number of addresses in the NCC stock is sort of "keeping up", about half
of 185 is used up - so with the current trend going on, 185 will be 
used up in 2018-2019 or so

https://labs.ripe.net/Members/marco_schmidt/taking-a-closer-look-at-the-last-slash-8

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: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: </ripe/mail/archives/address-policy-wg/attachments/20160417/7d1cf037/attachment.sig>