Gert and all, Nice bit of deflection/pigionholing I must say. But yes the subject line is with finding a consensus policy, however that consensus if such exists, is measured, for determining what is now questionably perceived to be the last /8. So far I prefer Leo's earlier suggestions as such at least provides for the possibility of some future recovery of unused IPv4 addresses in a round about way. Gert Doering wrote:
Hi,
On Wed, Jul 08, 2009 at 10:46:36PM +0900, Masataka Ohta wrote:
Gert Doering wrote:
Please stick to the topic of *this* discussion. Even with reclamation efforts, eventually we will reach the last /8,
Why?
Assuming reduction of address space consumption by mandating NAT, I can't understand how the last /8 could be reached before IPv4 will be replaced by something not likely to be IPv6.
Could you elaborate?
There is no mandate to use NAT in the RIPE region (and I think that this is a good thing, as NAT might be useful, but overall it takes away freedom from the Internet users, and this shouldn't be forced on anybody).
If the RIPE community wants to force NAT on people, well, they can of course change the policy. But in the policy as it is now, there is nothing that can force NAT on anybody. Given this, and given the growth of Internet in less-developed regions, yes, it is very likely that we'll reach the last /8. And soon.
and *this* discussion is only covering the rules for the last /8.
I don't think it off topic to discuss whether there will be the last /8 or not.
By decree of the WG chair it is off-topic *in this discussion thread*.
It is not off-topic on the list per se, but to keep some semblance of structure, *this* thread needs to focus on a very specific question.
It is a fair counter argument against a policy proposal on the last /8 to say there won't be the last /8.
Yes. But this specific discussion thread is about a very specific aspect of the proposal. Since we have different last-/8-Proposals on the table, we're trying to merge them into a common proposal, which you can then be opposed to.
But please do this in a new discussion thread with a new Subject: line.
Gert Doering -- APWG chair -- Total number of prefixes smaller than registry allocations: 128645
SpaceNet AG Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann D-80807 Muenchen HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen) Tel: +49 (89) 32356-444 USt-IdNr.: DE813185279
------------------------------------------------------------------------ Part 1.2Type: application/pgp-signature
Regards, Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 284k members/stakeholders strong!) "Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" - Abraham Lincoln "YES WE CAN!" Barack ( Berry ) Obama "Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is very often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt "If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B; liability depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by P: i.e., whether B is less than PL." United States v. Carroll Towing (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947] =============================================================== Updated 1/26/04 CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS. div. of Information Network Eng. INEG. INC. ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com My Phone: 214-244-4827