[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 ]