[address-policy-wg] IPv4 waiting list policy

Hi,

On Wed, Dec 08, 2021 at 06:03:53PM +1100, Arash Naderpour wrote:
> >My suggestion would be along the lines what was proposed on the APWG
> >meeting already - earmark these /24s as non-transferrable, ever.
> 
> I don't think it is a good idea to split the IPv4 addresses into different
> types, transferable and non-transferrable. it puts those newcomers in a
> disadvantageous position compared to the older members, it is not fair and
> doesn't fix anything in long term.

Actually, the point is to have something to offer to the newcomers.

If we do not stop the hoarding *now*, there won't be any IPv4 left - would
that be "more fair" to the newcomers?


I wouldn't mind a policy that says "The RIPE NCC does no longer deal in
IPv4 resources at all.  Everything coming back into the RIPE NCC free
pool is returned to IANA." - that would be maximally *fair* (the same
amount of nothing for everybody), but I assume you wouldn't like that
either.

Gert Doering
        -- NetMaster
-- 
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/20211208/4c81059f/attachment.sig>