[address-policy-wg] 2019-02 New Policy Proposal (Reducing IPv4 Allocations to a /24)

I support this proposal.

1) the intent of the last /8 policy is for new participants to go from 0
to not-0 IPv4 addresses.  While not-0 IPv4 addresses may not be enough
for a limited number of business cases, it *is* enough to bootstrap a
company (e.g. website, dns, email, nat64, etc).

2) When RIPE NCC is unable to allocate a contiguous /22, we are scraping
the bottom of the barrel.  A single /24 allocation helps the not-0
participants.

3) A /24 is the smallest allocation that is actually usable on the
internet.

4) While there is a belief The Internet(tm) should just up and migrate
to IPv6, that is unrealistic.  E.g. Twitter, Amazon, Reddit, Github, and
*many* home/business ISPs around the world do not even IPv6.  Whinging
about it in policy groups doesn't change that *fact*.

Yes, I prefer that people use IPv6.  But reality says IPv4 is still
important for new participants.



On 2019 Feb 04 (Mon) at 13:04:26 +0100 (+0100), Marco Schmidt wrote:
:Dear colleagues,
:
:A new RIPE Policy proposal, 2019-02, "Reducing IPv4 Allocations to a /24"
:is now available for discussion.
:
:This proposal aims to reduce the IPv4 allocation size to a /24 once the
:RIPE NCC is unable to allocate contiguous /22 ranges.
:
:You can find the full proposal at:
:https://www.ripe.net/participate/policies/proposals/2019-02
:
:As per the RIPE Policy Development Process (PDP), the purpose of this
:four week Discussion Phase is to discuss the proposal and provide
:feedback to the proposer.
:
:At the end of the Discussion Phase, the proposer, with the agreement of
:the WG Chairs, will decide how to proceed with the proposal.
:
:We encourage you to review this proposal and send your comments to
:<address-policy-wg at ripe.net> before 5 March 2019.
:
:Regards,
:
:Marco Schmidt
:Policy Officer
:
:

-- 
Bacchus, n.:
	A convenient deity invented by the ancients as an excuse for
getting drunk.
		-- Ambrose Bierce, "The Devil's Dictionary"