[address-policy-wg] Revision of Last /8 Allocation Criteria (Jim Reid)
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Revision of Last /8 Allocation Criteria (Jim Reid)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Revision of Last /8 Allocation Criteria (Jim Reid)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Jim Reid
jim at rfc1035.com
Mon Nov 16 14:22:53 CET 2015
On 16 Nov 2015, at 13:12, NOC ATOMOHOST <noc at atomohost.com> wrote: > > A lot of LIR's in the number of regions cannot allow themselves "serious approach to using IPv6" because of outdated infrustructure and lack of resources . I’m sympathetic to those problems Igor. Everyone is. But the root cause of these problems has to be tackled. Burning through the last reserves of IPv4 as a short-term workaround does not seem wise. It would be as pointless as putting a band-aid over an arterial bleed. The problems of outdated infrastructure and lack of resources would still be there after a more liberal allocation policy for the last /8 meant ALL of the remaining IPv4 was gone.
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Revision of Last /8 Allocation Criteria (Jim Reid)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Revision of Last /8 Allocation Criteria (Jim Reid)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]