[ppml] Restrictions on transferor deaggregation in 2008-2: IPv4 Transfer Policy Proposal
Jo Rhett
jrhett at svcolo.com
Tue Mar 11 15:26:14 EDT 2008
- Previous message: [ppml] Restrictions on transferor deaggregation in 2008-2: IPv4 Transfer Policy Proposal
- Next message: [ppml] Restrictions on transferor deaggregation in 2008-2: IPv4 Transfer Policy Proposal
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Ted Mittelstaedt wrote: > What you CANNOT have, is your cake and eat it to. You CANNOT have prolonged > IPv4 lifespan without an increase in deaggregation. I don't often find myself 100% agreeing with Ted, but this is one of those cases. I don't believe that preventing deaggregation is plausible. I suspect that attempts to do so with move parties interested in using the transfer policy (if approved) into the black market to avoid dealing with the policy limitations. Note: "I don't believe" and "I suspect" are key to understanding my PoV on this issue. I welcome enlightened argument to the contrary, at the cost of one beer at local pub. If you are an interesting talker, I'll buy the second round ;-) -- Jo Rhett senior geek Silicon Valley Colocation
- Previous message: [ppml] Restrictions on transferor deaggregation in 2008-2: IPv4 Transfer Policy Proposal
- Next message: [ppml] Restrictions on transferor deaggregation in 2008-2: IPv4 Transfer Policy Proposal
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the PPML mailing list