[ppml] Policy Proposal: Decreasing Exponential Rationing of IPv4 IP Addresses
dogwallah at gmail.com
Fri Aug 24 00:19:02 EDT 2007
On 8/23/07, Dean Anderson <dean at av8.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 23 Aug 2007, Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote:
> > The main reason is because its premise is flawed: the policy supposes
> > that making sure we don't run out of IPv4 address space the next 10
> > years is better than the situation where we do run out.
> I find it curious that people think that the effect of rationing (a
> temporary stop) is somehow worse than a permanent stop.
> > However, addresses that sit in the ARIN warehouse unused don't do the
> > community any good, while more stringent rules are harmful, because
> > they make new deployments harder, take longer, and increase risks.
> So you think we shouldn't turn down any request ever? All requests
> should be fullfilled under that notion. Obviously, we are already
> turning down requests.
It's not obvious to me, I don't even think it's happening (for reasons
of v4 scarcity).
Perhaps RS staff can say if this is the case.
$ whois -h whois.afrinic.net mctim
More information about the ARIN-PPML