This archive is retained to ensure existing URLs remain functional. It will not contain any emails sent to this mailing list after July 1, 2024. For all messages, including those sent before and after this date, please visit the new location of the archive at https://mailman.ripe.net/archives/list/address-policy-wg@ripe.net/
[address-policy-wg] proposal to remove IPv6 PI
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] proposal to remove IPv6 PI
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] [Ext] Re: proposal to remove IPv6 PI
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Kai 'wusel' Siering
wusel+ml at uu.org
Wed May 16 23:03:56 CEST 2018
Moin, am 16.05.2018 um 18:55 schrieb Sascha Luck [ml]: > This removes the need for ISPs or hosters to be LIRs where they > neither want to nor have the necessary skills or the time. > > The outcome would most likely be a lot fewer LIRs with a lot > higher fees but they can of course recoup these via fees to their > end users. If there would be only v6, I'd agree, but given that v4 refuses to die, IPv6 is a far lesser incentive to become an LIR compared to the /22 shot of IPv4. I don't expect the number of LIRs in the RIPE area to come down for the next few years. When the past-last-/8 pool has finally dried up, plus 2 years (holding time), well, yes, maybe. > > The only negative I can see is deaggregation of IPv6 space but I > think that particular boat sailed a long time ago... I certainly feels that way. Regards, -kai
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] proposal to remove IPv6 PI
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] [Ext] Re: proposal to remove IPv6 PI
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]