[address-policy-wg] 2019-02 New Policy Proposal (Reducing IPv4 Allocations to a /24)
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2019-02 New Policy Proposal (Reducing IPv4 Allocations to a /24)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2019-02 New Policy Proposal (Reducing IPv4 Allocations to a /24)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Carlos Friaças
cfriacas at fccn.pt
Tue Feb 19 09:07:35 CET 2019
Hello, On Mon, 18 Feb 2019, Martin Hun?k wrote: (...) > Unability to getting IPv4 from RIPE doesn't mean unability to get IPv4 > conectivity. Nor (some) IPv4 addresses, which can be obtained from "the market". > But it push the new player to start with IPv6 and get the v4 as a > service. Please go back and read why "You must deploy IPv6 in order to receive IPv4" (unfortunately) didn't stick... > It would make v4 as something extra what you are forced to pay extra, > perfect mindset to abadon it eventually. Nice plan, but there is just a very tiny detail... 75%-80% of the Internet is IPv4-only. > So once again, a faster we run out of IPv4 - a better. We have "run out of IPv4" (in a context of Internet's growth) since some years now... but people are still able to use it, and a lot of people/companies are NOT deploying IPv6 because they don't *need* it today. RIPE NCC's available IPv4 pool will not be empty everytime (addresses are de-registered by lack of payment, closures, ...), so a complete and *permanent* "run out of IPv4" is highly unlikely. > Martin Best Regards, Carlos
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2019-02 New Policy Proposal (Reducing IPv4 Allocations to a /24)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2019-02 New Policy Proposal (Reducing IPv4 Allocations to a /24)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]