[address-policy-wg] R: 2017-03 New Policy Proposal (Reducing Initial IPv4 Allocation, aiming to preserve a minimum of IPv4 space)
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] R: 2017-03 New Policy Proposal (Reducing Initial IPv4 Allocation, aiming to preserve a minimum of IPv4 space)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] R: 2017-03 New Policy Proposal (Reducing Initial IPv4 Allocation, aiming to preserve a minimum of IPv4 space)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Lu Heng
h.lu at anytimechinese.com
Fri Sep 22 11:41:55 CEST 2017
On Fri, Sep 22, 2017 at 17:40 Jetten Raymond <raymond.jetten at elisa.fi> wrote: > Dear AP-WG, > > I Oppose this 2017-03 proposal, > > IPv6 has been around for decades, and "we" have failed to implement it in > time. I see no point in rewarding laziness and yet trying to again give > more time to seriously start to implement v6. The more time we are given, > the more time it will take, that’s how we have done it in the past, and I > don’t see the laziness go if not forced to. Warnings were ignored, we (v6 > advocates) were laughed at, "again it will end", " you’ve told us that many > years". Even if we only hand out a /28, we still have the basic problem, > and it won't go away v4 WILL run out. Don’t make the suffering any longer. > > Rgds, > > Ray > +1 > > -----Original Message----- > From: address-policy-wg [mailto:address-policy-wg-bounces at ripe.net] On > Behalf Of Palumbo Flavio > Sent: 22. syyskuuta 2017 11:17 > To: Daniel Suchy <danny at danysek.cz>; address-policy-wg at ripe.net > Subject: [address-policy-wg] R: 2017-03 New Policy Proposal (Reducing > Initial IPv4 Allocation, aiming to preserve a minimum of IPv4 space) > > I don't see TOO any problem in reduction of initial (minimal) IPv4 > allocation. So i support this idea TOO . > > -----Messaggio originale----- > Da: address-policy-wg [mailto:address-policy-wg-bounces at ripe.net] Per > conto di Daniel Suchy > Inviato: venerdì 22 settembre 2017 10:09 > A: address-policy-wg at ripe.net > Oggetto: Re: [address-policy-wg] 2017-03 New Policy Proposal (Reducing > Initial IPv4 Allocation, aiming to preserve a minimum of IPv4 space) > > Hello, > /24 is de-facto standard accepted in routing tables these days and also > /24 was used in large scale during PI assignments - so I don't see any > problem in reduction of initial (minimal) IPv4 allocation. So i support > this idea. > > But I would like to keep option for asking more than /24 (up to /22 > maximum, as was decided in the past) LIRs eligible for allocation, if LIR > properly documents his request. > > From my own practice there're some LIR, where /24 is sufficient and they > just become LIRs because there's no other real option to get independent > addresses (old "PI") and with /22 we're just wasting limited resource. > But there're also LIRs, where /22 will actively used. > > I don't see any problems in terms of RFC 2050 mentioned here and memory > contraints, providers had to upgrade their routers in meantime anyway (at > least due to IPv6 adoption). Fragmentation up to /24 is long-term reality > and we had to deal with it anyway. > > With regards, > Daniel > > > On 09/21/2017 01:43 PM, Marco Schmidt wrote: > > Dear colleagues, > > > > A new RIPE Policy proposal, 2017-03, "Reducing Initial IPv4 > > Allocation, aiming to preserve a minimum of IPv4 space", is now > available for discussion. > > > > The goal of this proposal is to reduce the IPv4 allocations made by > > the RIPE NCC to a /24 (currently a /22) and only to LIRs that have not > > received an IPv4 allocation directly from the RIPE NCC before. > > > > You can find the full proposal at: > > https://www.ripe.net/participate/policies/proposals/2017-03/ > > > > As per the RIPE Policy Development Process (PDP), the purpose of this > > four-week Discussion Phase is to discuss the proposal and provide > feedback to the proposer. > > > > At the end of the Discussion Phase, the proposer, with the agreement > > of the RIPE Working Group Chairs, decides how to proceed with the > proposal. > > > > We encourage you to review this proposal and send your comments to > > <address-policy-wg at ripe.net> before 20 October 2017. > > > > Kind regards, > > > > Marco Schmidt > > Policy Development Officer > > RIPE NCC > > > > Sent via RIPE Forum -- https://www.ripe.net/participate/mail/forum > > > > > Check Point > Le informazioni contenute in questo messaggio di posta elettronica e in > ogni > eventuale documento allegato sono riservate, potrebbero essere coperte dal > segreto professionale e possono essere utilizzate esclusivamente dal > destinatario sopra indicato. Ogni divulgazione o copia di questo messaggio > o > dei suoi eventuali allegati non autorizzata, cosi' come ogni uso o > divulgazione delle informazioni negli stessi contenute, sono da > considerarsi > come vietate e potrebbero costituire violazione delle normative ivi > applicabili. Se ricevete questo messaggio per errore Vi preghiamo di > volerci avvertire immediatamente tramite posta elettronica o > telefonicamente > e di cancellare il presente messaggio e ogni documento ad esso allegato dal > Vostro sistema. Vi informiamo che svolgiamo ogni attivita' finalizzata a > proteggere la nostra rete da virus e non ci assumiamo alcuna > responsabilita' > in ordine a possibili virus che possano essere trasferiti con la presente > mail. > Grazie. > > ***************** > > The information contained in this e-mail and in any file transmitted with > it > is confidential and may be privileged for the sole use of the designated > addressee. Any unauthorized dissemination or copying of this e-mail or its > attachments, and any use or disclosure of any information contained in > them, > is strictly prohibited and may be illegal. If you are not the designated > addressee, please notify the sender immediately by e-mail or by telephone > and delete this e-mail and any file transmitted with it from your system. > We make every effort to keep our network free from viruses and take no > responsibility for any computer virus which might be transferred by way of > this > e-mail. > Thank you. > -- -- Kind regards. Lu -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <https://lists.ripe.net/ripe/mail/archives/address-policy-wg/attachments/20170922/c47ada7f/attachment.html>
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] R: 2017-03 New Policy Proposal (Reducing Initial IPv4 Allocation, aiming to preserve a minimum of IPv4 space)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] R: 2017-03 New Policy Proposal (Reducing Initial IPv4 Allocation, aiming to preserve a minimum of IPv4 space)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]