[address-policy-wg] 2008-01 Moved to Review Phase (Assigning IPv6 PI to Every Inetnum Holder)
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2008-01 Moved to Review Phase (Assigning IPv6 PI to Every Inetnum Holder)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2008-01 Moved to Review Phase (Assigning IPv6 PI to Every Inetnum Holder)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Marco Hogewoning
marcoh at marcoh.net
Thu Mar 20 11:01:34 CET 2008
On 19 mrt 2008, at 16:40, Bernhard Schmidt wrote: > Filiz Yilmaz wrote: > >> We encourage you to send your comments to address-policy- >> wg at ripe.net before 16 April 2008. > > I strongly oppose this (2008-01) proposal for the reasons James A. > T. Rice has given. Why would we want to forward all the messy swamp > space issues we have in IPv4 to IPv6? > > I abstain from voting on 2008-02, I don't think it is necessary to > push address space to people who don't use it. No size fits > everyone, getting PAv6 is easy enough (especially since 2006-02) and > allocations serve as good indicator for the growth of IPv6. Also I > suspect this will create issues with the scoring system for people > who suddenly have to pay for address space they didn't even want. > But if the community thinks that this is a good move then go ahead. Can't add much more as 'I fully agree', it seems as bad as the goold old classfull days and /8's. Groet, MarcoH
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2008-01 Moved to Review Phase (Assigning IPv6 PI to Every Inetnum Holder)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2008-01 Moved to Review Phase (Assigning IPv6 PI to Every Inetnum Holder)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]