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

> On Apr 17, 2016, at 03:31, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ <jordi.palet at consulintel.es> wrote:
> 
> I think we need something comprehensive such:
> 
> 1) Allocations of the last /8 reduced to /24, maybe after a trigger point, such as /10 as Tim mention.
> 2) We want this for only new entrants ?
> 3) Mandate to have a credible IPv6 deployment plan for those getting 1) simultaneous to the use of the allocated IPv4 resources, which means getting IPv6 allocation at the same time.
> 4) May be, no new allocations from recovered resources, which may be kept for emergency situations, experiments, or whatever.
> 5) No new IPv4 policies.
> 
> We may debate each point as part of a single policy proposal, or split in several in case is difficult to reach consensus.
> 
> Randy, I will be happy to work on that if you like a co-author.
> 
> Regards,
> Jordi
> 
> 
> 


I like it. I'm in if more are needed 

Best,

Marty















> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -----Mensaje original-----
> De: address-policy-wg <address-policy-wg-bounces at ripe.net> en nombre de Randy Bush <randy at psg.com>
> Responder a: <randy at psg.com>
> Fecha: domingo, 17 de abril de 2016, 4:50
> Para: Lu Heng <h.lu at anytimechinese.com>
> CC: RIPE Address Policy WG <address-policy-wg at ripe.net>
> Asunto: Re: [address-policy-wg] 2015-05 Discussion Period extended until 13 May 2016 (Last /8 Allocation Criteria Revision)
> 
>>>> well, it is some years too late for it to go along with the last /8,
>>>> policy unless you have a time machine.  but it might mean we won't have
>>>> to deal with the endless proposals to modify the last /8 policy which
>>>> seem to come up every year, flood the mailing list, and eventually fail.
>>> Exactly, the sad part is, this is essentially the last and only thing you
>>> can propose a policy regarding v4.
>> 
>> not exactly.  one can propose something in the opposite direction;
>> allocations from the last /8 be reduced to /24.  it may make ipv4
>> last longer for the new entrants.  and a /24 should be sufficient
>> for a large nat.
>> 
>> i.e. i was serious the other day.
>> 
>> randy
> 
> 
> 
> **********************************************
> IPv4 is over
> Are you ready for the new Internet ?
> http://www.consulintel.es
> The IPv6 Company
> 
> This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or confidential. The information is intended to be for the use of the individual(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, including attached files, is prohibited.
> 
> 
> 
>