cscott at gaslightmedia.com
Wed Jan 10 14:47:54 EST 2001
On Wed, 10 Jan 2001 bmanning at vacation.karoshi.com wrote:
> "grandfathered" delegations have been done so for a reason.
> changing the rules after the fact and forcing renumbering
> will bring legal challanges.
This is a good point, but the same can be said of existing allocations
when trying to justify additional address space. In otherwords, if a
hosting service has currently deployed IP based hosting, which was
necessary/reasonable/acceptable in the past, it would seem to be unfair to
refuse additional address space until those conform to a new policy
(which may require significant time and expense).
Still, I belive that everyone has an interest in extending the life of
IPv4 address space, particularly in many cases companies with historic
large allocations, and should therefore be compliant with efforts to
reclaim any large unused address space. But the question of what is more
reasonable, to reclaim "unused" address space or force improved efficency
of address space currently providing valuable service, seems to be a
More information about the Vwp