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/[email protected]/
[address-policy-wg] 2017-03 New Policy Proposal (Reducing Initial IPv4 Allocation, aiming to preserve a minimum of IPv4 space)
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2017-03 New Policy Proposal (Reducing Initial IPv4 Allocation, aiming to preserve a minimum of IPv4 space)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2017-03 New Policy Proposal (Reducing Initial IPv4 Allocation, aiming to preserve a minimum of IPv4 space)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Peer Kohlstetter
Kohlstetter at hessenkom.de
Fri Sep 22 22:12:30 CEST 2017
Hello WG, the discussion shows that there are a lot of pros and cons about this proposal. But the strongest argument for me is that we will have IPv4 around for very long time and this proposal help to gives every newcomer a fair start. That's the main Idea of the last /8. Because of this I support the proposal. The IPv4 world with BGP, NAT, CGN and IPv4 Transfers has shown big adaptability. If the best argument for IPv6 rollout is the end of the IPv4 world, we have to wait very long for a widely used IPv6 Internet. IPv4 is a very robust beast. Because of this we use and love it. :-) Best regards, Peer -------------------------------------------- blue networks GmbH & Co KG Peer Kohlstetter Mail: kohlstetter at blue-networks.de
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2017-03 New Policy Proposal (Reducing Initial IPv4 Allocation, aiming to preserve a minimum of IPv4 space)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2017-03 New Policy Proposal (Reducing Initial IPv4 Allocation, aiming to preserve a minimum of IPv4 space)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]