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

On Tue, May 17, 2016 at 2:05 PM, Marco Schmidt <mschmidt at ripe.net> wrote:
> Dear colleagues,
>
> A new RIPE Policy proposal 2016-03, "Locking Down the Final /8 Policy"
> is now available for discussion.

What really amaze me. We are using tons of time here in ag-wg talking
over IPv4 while there is not half that activity over in IPv6-wg.


I take that as a statement that everyone know everything there is to
know about IPv6, there are nothing more to discuss or learn, no
questions to ask, we are all using it so very few people are left
behind in IPv4 land... soon to be isolated island not able to talk
with anyone.

... is that how it is?



Why aren't all of you with HUGE and MAJOR problem (sorry for the caps)
with lack of IPv4 address over in IPv6-wg bombing us with question on
how to get out of your current trouble?
Asking all kind of stupid and newbie questions? I'm very sure there
are tons of people standing in line to help you out.

https://www.ripe.net/participate/ripe/wg/ipv6





PS 1 : chairs - I object to this policy and the other one trying to
sort a problem that can't be sorted in IPv4 land, only IPv6 can.


PS 2 : Nick Hillard summarized it very well here:
<start copy>
Like the curate's egg, this proposal is good in parts. Here's the good part:

> - Explicitly state that the current IPv4 allocation policy applies to
> all available IPv4 address space held by the RIPE NCC that has not
> been reserved or marked to be returned to IANA
<end copy>

-- 

Roger Jorgensen           | ROJO9-RIPE
rogerj at gmail.com          | - IPv6 is The Key!
http://www.jorgensen.no   | roger at jorgensen.no