RE: [address-policy-wg] RE: Private address space in IPv4 and IPv6 [was something irrelevantly titled]
Not each other, but all to some! From: David Freedman [mailto:david.freedman@uk.clara.net] Sent: Friday, May 29, 2009 2:06 PM To: Potapov Vladislav; jeroen@unfix.org Cc: nick@inex.ie; frederic@placenet.org; address-policy-wg@ripe.net Subject: RE: [address-policy-wg] RE: Private address space in IPv4 and IPv6 [was something irrelevantly titled]
It's the problem of the merging banks or any other companies, not the whole World. Why RIPE should do the work for them?
I distill that argument down to "why should we help eachother", this is starting to go seriously off-topic now. Dave.
I distill that argument down to "why should we help eachother", this is starting to go seriously off-topic now.
Not each other, but all to some!
Reductio ad absurdum. You argue "why should the many help the few?". Perhaps you are right. Perhaps the RIRs should stop helping the few ISPs of the world and instead allocate one of the 4 billion IPv4 addresses to each one of the world's 4 billon people. Of course, the fact is that by sharing equally with everybody, the RIRs would be helping nobody at all. The current system has evolved precisely because it provides the MOST benefits to the MOST people. It does not force everyone to conform to the RIPE way of doing things, instead RIPE changes its practice to align with the needs of everyone else. There is give and take, compromises are found, and everybody gets to make their networks work well enough so that the industry keeps growing. IPv4 runout proves that the historical ways are the right ways. --Michael Dillon
participants (2)
-
michael.dillon@bt.com
-
poty@iiat.ru