[address-policy-wg] [policy-announce] 2012-04 New Draft Document Published (PI Assignments from the last /8)
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] [policy-announce] 2012-04 New Draft Document Published (PI Assignments from the last /8)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] [policy-announce] 2012-04 New Draft Document Published (PI Assignments from the last /8)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Rico Gloeckner
rg at teamix.de
Mon Sep 17 08:05:29 CEST 2012
Hi, On Sat, Sep 15, 2012 at 04:57:48PM +0200, Sebastian Wiesinger wrote: > I agree with Randy and oppose this proposal. We should not use the > last /8 for PI space but for LIRs who need at least a bit of v4 space > to get going. There is no distinct difference between LIR and non-LIR except paying two grand a year. Lets assume the simple scenario that someone wants IP Space. Without the proposal you pay 2 grand a year and get a /22, no questions asked. With the Proposal you pay whatever your LIR bills you and get a /24. I assume there will be quite some (non-ISP) Organizations who will choose being LIR over getting a PI because they get more IP Adresses. Without the proposal you force ALL organizations to do so. Now, which scenario will likely run out quicker? Rico MfG/regards, -- Rico Gloeckner teamix GmbH Suedwestpark 35 90449 Nuernberg Amtsgericht Nuernberg, HRB 18320 Geschaeftsfuehrer: Oliver Kuegow, Richard Mueller
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] [policy-announce] 2012-04 New Draft Document Published (PI Assignments from the last /8)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] [policy-announce] 2012-04 New Draft Document Published (PI Assignments from the last /8)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]