[address-policy-wg] 2016-03 New Policy Proposal (Locking Down the Final /8 Policy)

Agree on this.

It's not only we erode the free pool faster, but we get a lot of 
unconscious RIPE NCC members this way.

On 06/12/16 00:44, Aled Morris wrote:
>
>
> So for all those people who argue we should be preserving the 
> remaining address space in order to allow for new ISPs entering the 
> market for as long as possible (which I agree with), we need to be 
> realistic about end users who want (what was once called) PI space and 
> not make the only option to be "become an LIR" with the result that we 
> erode the free pool faster (i.e. allocating /22 when a /24 would be 
> more than adequate.)
>
> Aled

-- 
Kind regards,
CTO at
*Foton Telecom CJSC*
Tel.: +7 (499) 679-99-99
AS42861 on PeeringDB <http://as42861.peeringdb.com/>, Qrator 
<https://radar.qrator.net/as42861>, BGP.HE.NET <http://bgp.he.net/AS42861>

http://ipv6actnow.org/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: </ripe/mail/archives/address-policy-wg/attachments/20160612/834f8a56/attachment.html>