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

On Fri, May 20, 2016 at 3:17 PM, Gert Doering <gert at space.net> wrote:
> Dear Working Group,
>
> On Fri, May 20, 2016 at 03:02:43PM +0200, Marco Schmidt wrote:
>> The Discussion Period for the proposal 2015-05, "Last /8 Allocation
>> Criteria Revision" has been extended until 13 June 2016.
>
> this has been decided by proposers and WG chairs based on your discussion
> and the upcoming AP meeting at RIPE72 (next wednesday) - keep the proposal
> active until after the discussion there (see below), then decide how to
> proceed.
>
>
> From the discussion it was very clear that there is no consensus today
> to go ahead - without going into detail, it's clear that there are two
> strong factions, one that wants to preserve the remaining /22s for
> "as long as possible", while the other one wants to ease the pain for
> those LIRs that have too little IPv4 today, willing to incur earlier
> total run-out as a consequence.

Since we've supposed to work toward something that can gain consensus
I've got a few questions for the authors, and those supporting 2015-05.


So far all I've heard, I might have missed something, is that there is a
need for more addresses. None have said why, or where there is a
need. Why do you need more addresses and for what?

Be specific, is it for having more address for the end-users? Datacenter?
Services? Infrastructure? IPv6-to-IPv4 services? CGN? Proxyes?



-- 

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