[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 ]
Servereasy
info at servereasy.it
Sat Apr 16 15:23:54 CEST 2016
As we all know, there are lot of big LIRs with plenty of unused (or wasted) space, and now they are making serious business selling their classes. With a current price of about 10€/IP, it's easy to understand how big are interests behind this: some LIRs could make M€ just by selling something they obtained for free some years ago. It's clear that we can't "generate" more IPv4, but IMHO this is totally against a fair market. A new LIR with just a /22 shouldn't be charged like one with tons of /12: if having lot of IPv4 would be anti-economical for big LIRs, this would be a *real* incentivation for IPv6 deployment and return of IPv4. I'm not a lawyer, but probabily this problem should be reviewd by European Commission for Competition. Br -- Saverio Giuntini Servereasy di Giuntini Saverio Amministrazione e system manager -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <https://lists.ripe.net/ripe/mail/archives/address-policy-wg/attachments/20160416/6ca7094a/attachment.html>
- 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 ]