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] stockpiling IPv6
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] stockpiling IPv6
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] stockpiling IPv6
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Paul Thornton
paul at prtsystems.ltd.uk
Wed Oct 28 15:24:32 CET 2020
On 28/10/2020 13:03, Nick Hilliard wrote: > Hi Jordi, > > JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via address-policy-wg wrote on 28/10/2020 12:13: >> Could you explain why not? > > because the purpose of a registry is to ensure accurate registration > information rather than to micromanage resources. As far as I can > see, the RIPE NCC is doing its job here and there's no need to > instruct it to go off and do something else. > > There's no shortage of ipv6 address space and no reason to think that > we will ever end up with a future shortage. So there is no reason for > people to treat ipv6 address blocks as having future scarcity value, > which means that there is no motivation to "stockpile". I.e. the > entire basis of your argument is void. +1. I also strongly believe that there is no real problem to solve here. Paul.
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] stockpiling IPv6
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] stockpiling IPv6
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]