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

Hello,

I've read the proposal and arguments for and against and indeed all the 
various different opinions presented. Although I can see some merit to 
support the proposal from a needs based perspective and use of reclaimed 
addresses. Personally I cannot however ignore the fact that new LIR's 
into the future will need IPv4 to implement IPv6 based solutions of 
whatever flavour, and therefore I cannot support this policy change as I 
believe the current policy is fit for purpose.

To confirm I do not support this policy proposal.

Kind Regards,

Guy

On 14/04/2016 13:41, Marco Schmidt wrote:
> Dear colleagues,
>
> The Discussion Period for the policy proposal 2015-05, "Last /8
> Allocation Criteria Revision" has been extended until 13 May 2016.
>
> The goal of this proposal is to allow LIRs to request an additional /22
> IPv4 allocation from the RIPE NCC every 18 months.
>
> The text of the proposal has been revised based on mailing list feedback
> and we have published a new version (2.0) today. As a result, a new
> Discussion Phase has started for the proposal.
>
> Some of the differences from version 1.0 include:
> - Additional /22 IPv4 allocations can be only provided from address
> space outside 185/8
> - Only LIRs with less than a /20 in total are eligible to receive
> additional allocations
> - LIRs must document their IPv6 deployment as part of the request
>
> You can find the full proposal at:
>
> https://www.ripe.net/participate/policies/proposals/2015-05
>
> We encourage you to review this policy proposal and send your comments
> to <address-policy-wg at ripe.net>.
>
> Regards,
>
> Marco Schmidt
> Policy Development Officer
> RIPE NCC
>