[address-policy-wg] 2015-05 Discussion Period extended until 13 May 2016 (Last /8 Allocation Criteria Revision)
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2015-05 Discussion Period extended until 13 May 2016 (Last /8 Allocation Criteria Revision)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2015-05 Discussion Period extended until 13 May 2016 (Last /8 Allocation Criteria Revision)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Radu-Adrian FEURDEAN
ripe-wgs at radu-adrian.feurdean.net
Sat Apr 16 12:27:50 CEST 2016
Hi, On Fri, Apr 15, 2016, at 07:48, Riccardo Gori wrote: > We are dealing with the same amount of space as September 2012 that in > the meanwhile has been abused in several ways and there are really no > incentives to IPv6 adoption. > > There was only one requirement to obtain one IPv4 /22: request and > obtain at least from /32 IPv6 to a maximum of /29 IPv6. > Am I wrong or this requirement has been removed?!?! Please explain that > to a new entrant... Not only that, but since 2014 IPv4 blocks are to be handed without any justification. Basically RIPE NCC sells IPv4 adresses. I would definitely NOT call that a success. > I think this policy is not for faster exhaustion but for "farier > exhaustion" and is offering a path to go over IPv4 while still needing > it to grow. What we are trying to compensante is the "fair" part which is diminishing with time. -- Radu-Adrian FEURDEAN fr.ccs
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2015-05 Discussion Period extended until 13 May 2016 (Last /8 Allocation Criteria Revision)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2015-05 Discussion Period extended until 13 May 2016 (Last /8 Allocation Criteria Revision)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]