[address-policy-wg] Suggested updates to 2010-05 (Global Policy for IPv4 Allocation by the IANA post exhaustion)
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Suggested updates to 2010-05 (Global Policy for IPv4 Allocation by the IANA post exhaustion)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Suggested updates to 2010-05 (Global Policy for IPv4 Allocation by the IANA post exhaustion)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Chris Grundemann
cgrundemann at gmail.com
Tue Sep 21 01:26:21 CEST 2010
On Mon, Sep 20, 2010 at 16:20, Nick Hilliard <nick at inex.ie> wrote: > > Regardless of the history of the previous proposal, history will not look > back kindly if we collectively flail our arms in the air and claim "it > would never work, so there's no point in even trying". Call this naivety, > idealism, or stupidity - I don't really care. The policy has merit and > refusing to deal with it now (while we're still vaguely sanguine about IPv4 > address allocation) will merely create a much more troublesome environment > for attempting to get any sort of global agreement of any sort in the > future (when no-one will be even remotely happy about allocation policy). > I completely agree. You have, in fact, written a fairly accurate description of why I am putting my time and effort into this policy. Now is the time to act - we can neither live in the past nor expect the future to take care of itself. ~Chris (again speaking entirely on my own) > > Nick > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <https://lists.ripe.net/ripe/mail/archives/address-policy-wg/attachments/20100920/9099e637/attachment.html>
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Suggested updates to 2010-05 (Global Policy for IPv4 Allocation by the IANA post exhaustion)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Suggested updates to 2010-05 (Global Policy for IPv4 Allocation by the IANA post exhaustion)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]