On 11/29/2011 17:51, Mark Andrews wrote:
In message <4ED5720A(_dot_)5020401(_at_)dougbarton(_dot_)us>, Doug Barton
writes:
On 11/29/2011 15:37, Chris Grundemann wrote:
I support draft-weil-shared-transition-space-request and the
allocation of a /10 as Shared CGN Space because we are approaching
complete global exhaustion of unallocated IPv4 addresses and the value
of globally unique addresses is becoming manifest.
As others have pointed out, those ideas contradict one another. The fact
that free addresses are so valuable is precisely why they shouldn't be
taken away from new entrants to the market in order to benefit the
grasshoppers who've fiddled away the summer. And yes, I realize that
1,024 /20s is just a drop in the bucket. But sometimes the principle of
the thing IS the thing.
And if we had done this several years ago
... but we didn't.
we would have left even more space
to new comers as the RIR's could have use this space in assessing requests
for additional space. ISP that use this block could collectively return
much more space to the free pool than this will consume.
... and yet at this point we all know that noone who has substantial
IPv4 space is going to return it to the RIRs.
Doug
--
"We could put the whole Internet into a book."
"Too practical."
Breadth of IT experience, and depth of knowledge in the DNS.
Yours for the right price. :) http://SupersetSolutions.com/
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf