Re: [address-policy-wg] Revision of Last /8 Allocation Criteria (Jim Reid)
Every LIR really has to accept that they have to wean themselves off IPv4 and have a serious approach to using IPv6. You’re going to have to do this at some point. You might as well do it now. IPv4 allocations from the RIRs are not going to last forever. Changing the address policy for everyone just so you can continue with an IPv4-only networking approach for a few more months is both unfair and unwise.
Dear Jim, A lot of LIR's in the number of regions cannot allow themselves "serious approach to using IPv6" because of outdated infrustructure and lack of resources . We offer (see my previous mail) to let them grow and expand and let them opportunity to accumulate resources for update and renew their infrustructures. We expect that subsequently this can help such LIRs to deploy IPv6. Also worth mentioning that our adjustment restricts the possibilities to abuse policy changes by major LIRs who are already have the opportunity to deploy IPv6. -- Best regards, Igor Strelyaniy Network Operation Manager ATOMOHOST LLC email: noc@atomohost.com website: atomohost.com
On 16 Nov 2015, at 13:12, NOC ATOMOHOST <noc@atomohost.com> wrote:
A lot of LIR's in the number of regions cannot allow themselves "serious approach to using IPv6" because of outdated infrustructure and lack of resources .
I’m sympathetic to those problems Igor. Everyone is. But the root cause of these problems has to be tackled. Burning through the last reserves of IPv4 as a short-term workaround does not seem wise. It would be as pointless as putting a band-aid over an arterial bleed. The problems of outdated infrastructure and lack of resources would still be there after a more liberal allocation policy for the last /8 meant ALL of the remaining IPv4 was gone.
16.11.2015 15:22, Jim Reid пишет:
I’m sympathetic to those problems Igor. Everyone is. But the root cause of these problems has to be tackled. Burning through the last reserves of IPv4 as a short-term workaround does not seem wise. It would be as pointless as putting a band-aid over an arterial bleed. The problems of outdated infrastructure and lack of resources would still be there after a more liberal allocation policy for the last /8 meant ALL of the remaining IPv4 was gone.
For now just a half of the last /8 (8mln) can help 7.812 LIRs to grow twice. I have no information about how many LIRs fall under our adjustment criteria. Maybe someone (RIPE staff e.g.) can announce the number of LIRs and their average pools so we can calculate the benefits and the consequences. I agree with your concerns but think that if we want to deploy IPv6 we should seek the ways to LIRs developement because valves twisting spawns abusers but not reformers. -- Best regards, Igor Strelyaniy Network Operation Manager ATOMOHOST LLC email: noc@atomohost.com website: atomohost.com
participants (2)
-
Jim Reid -
NOC ATOMOHOST