[address-policy-wg] R: address-policy-wg

On 29.10.2015 15:09, Alessio Genova wrote:
> Vice versa I’m sure that RIPE should verify who really is using public
> IPs, or should introduce a way to avoid IPs market, giving IPs at who
> really needs them.

In case of stopping of CGN/NAT usage in incumbent's networks (which're
holding large allocations), they *WILL* need them like you. Everyone
needs them, but IPv4 address space is exhausted - that's reality and
these days you *must* deploy NAT for end-users.

I don't see any way of *avoiding* IP market. There will be always some
ways to bypass policy. In worst case we'll have inaccurate registry as
consequence of strict regulations avoiding transfers etc. This approach
never worked.

With regards,
Daniel

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 4233 bytes
Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
URL: <https://lists.ripe.net/ripe/mail/archives/address-policy-wg/attachments/20151030/77069630/attachment.p7s>