This archive is retained to ensure existing URLs remain functional. It will not contain any emails sent to this mailing list after July 1, 2024. For all messages, including those sent before and after this date, please visit the new location of the archive at https://mailman.ripe.net/archives/list/address-policy-wg@ripe.net/
[address-policy-wg] 2015-05 Discussion Period extended until 13 June 2016 (Last /8 Allocation Criteria Revision)
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2015-05 Discussion Period extended until 13 June 2016 (Last /8 Allocation Criteria Revision)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2015-05 Discussion Period extended until 13 June 2016 (Last /8 Allocation Criteria Revision)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Riccardo Gori
rgori at wirem.net
Sun May 22 10:29:37 CEST 2016
Il 21/05/2016 12:05, Nick Hilliard ha scritto: > Roger Jørgensen wrote: >> Be specific, is it for having more address for the end-users? Datacenter? >> Services? Infrastructure? IPv6-to-IPv4 services? CGN? Proxyes? > [x] all of the above, and more. > > This question isn't relevant as it seems - lots of organisations have > their needs and the RIPE NCC cannot and should not be arbiter of whose > need is greatest or should take precedence. > > What's relevant is that due to a shortage of IPv4 address space, > businesses are being forced to change business practices. This impacts > on AP-WG because on the one hand, there are some addresses left at the > bottom of the RIPE NCC barrel, and on the other, many LIRs are looking > at these addresses, realising that if they could only get their hands on > some of them, it would make life a whole lot easier. AP-WG is seen as a > place that could potentially tilt the balance one way or another, if > only consensus could be gained. > > There are no good solutions to the problem at hand, only compromises. > If the current policy is changed to something else, the people who > benefit in the short term will be happier and the people who pay for > this generosity will be disappointed. IPv6 > > And, as has been pointed out repeatedly by many people for many years, > full depletion is only a couple of years down the road, regardless of > what allocation policy is applied. Any change of policy is little more > than rearranging deck-chairs on the Titanic. > > The ship is going down and there is nothing that anyone in the world can > do to prevent this. > > Nick > every policy that makes IPv6 adoption a must can help slow down IPv4 allocation rate and in the meanwhile will even lower IPv4 maket value that's why there is the so called "no solution" sorry for brevity, family time.... regards Riccardo -- Ing. Riccardo Gori e-mail: rgori at wirem.net Mobile: +39 339 8925947 Mobile: +34 602 009 437 Profile: https://it.linkedin.com/in/riccardo-gori-74201943 WIREM Fiber Revolution Net-IT s.r.l. Via Cesare Montanari, 2 47521 Cesena (FC) Tel +39 0547 1955485 Fax +39 0547 1950285 -------------------------------------------------------------------- CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE This message and its attachments are addressed solely to the persons above and may contain confidential information. If you have received the message in error, be informed that any use of the content hereof is prohibited. Please return it immediately to the sender and delete the message. Should you have any questions, please contact us by re- plying to info at wirem.net Thank you WIREM - Net-IT s.r.l.Via Cesare Montanari, 2 - 47521 Cesena (FC) -------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: </ripe/mail/archives/address-policy-wg/attachments/20160522/caccceff/attachment.html> -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: logoWirem_4cm_conR.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 41774 bytes Desc: not available URL: </ripe/mail/archives/address-policy-wg/attachments/20160522/caccceff/attachment.jpg>
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2015-05 Discussion Period extended until 13 June 2016 (Last /8 Allocation Criteria Revision)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2015-05 Discussion Period extended until 13 June 2016 (Last /8 Allocation Criteria Revision)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]