[address-policy-wg] 2016-03 New Policy Proposal (Locking Down the Final /8 Policy)
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2016-03 New Policy Proposal (Locking Down the Final /8 Policy)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2016-03 New Policy Proposal (Locking Down the Final /8 Policy)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Sergey
gforgx at fotontel.ru
Sat Jun 11 23:50:29 CEST 2016
Agree on this. It's not only we erode the free pool faster, but we get a lot of unconscious RIPE NCC members this way. On 06/12/16 00:44, Aled Morris wrote: > > > So for all those people who argue we should be preserving the > remaining address space in order to allow for new ISPs entering the > market for as long as possible (which I agree with), we need to be > realistic about end users who want (what was once called) PI space and > not make the only option to be "become an LIR" with the result that we > erode the free pool faster (i.e. allocating /22 when a /24 would be > more than adequate.) > > Aled -- Kind regards, CTO at *Foton Telecom CJSC* Tel.: +7 (499) 679-99-99 AS42861 on PeeringDB <http://as42861.peeringdb.com/>, Qrator <https://radar.qrator.net/as42861>, BGP.HE.NET <http://bgp.he.net/AS42861> http://ipv6actnow.org/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <https://lists.ripe.net/ripe/mail/archives/address-policy-wg/attachments/20160612/834f8a56/attachment.html>
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2016-03 New Policy Proposal (Locking Down the Final /8 Policy)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2016-03 New Policy Proposal (Locking Down the Final /8 Policy)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]