[address-policy-wg] question about IPv4 legacy and transfers - should we convert legacy to non-legacy with transfers?

Hi,

On Tue, Jul 16, 2019 at 10:29:28AM +0200, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via address-policy-wg wrote:
> Again, please consider, if it is good that we are the only RIR not doing so. I don't think that's good.

If this is the main argument ("I changed this in all the other RIRs, 
and now *you* are the only ones stubbornly refusing to follow my 
all-the-others-are-doing-this argument") - it's a somewhat weak one.

You have failed to bring forward any reason for changing things, except

 "it is unfair that there is a difference"

(without detailing what exactly the unfairness would be, who would
be disadvantaged by this, exactly, and why they would be affected 
positively by this proposal) - and

 "all the other RIRs have changed this!"

which is both not very compelling.


I could also not see anyone speak up in a supportive way, so I'd consider
this "sufficiently discussed, and no support to go for a formal proposal".

Gert Doering
        -- APWG chair
-- 
have you enabled IPv6 on something today...?

SpaceNet AG                      Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard, Michael Emmer
Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14        Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann
D-80807 Muenchen                 HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen)
Tel: +49 (0)89/32356-444         USt-IdNr.: DE813185279
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: </ripe/mail/archives/address-policy-wg/attachments/20190716/c4787475/attachment.sig>