[address-policy-wg] Comment on IPv4 depletion rate for proposal 2015-05
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Comment on IPv4 depletion rate for proposal 2015-05
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Comment on IPv4 depletion rate for proposal 2015-05
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Radu-Adrian FEURDEAN
ripe-wgs at radu-adrian.feurdean.net
Tue May 10 16:46:15 CEST 2016
On Tue, May 10, 2016, at 14:16, Peter Hessler wrote: > This was called "Provider Independent" and for IPv4, it was killed off > some years ago. Yes, except that the need for "provider independent" IP blocks did not disappear. Only the "ASSIGNED PI" status for new blocks did. The "ALLOCATED PA" is a good enough substitute for those needing it. Then there's still the "multihome with ASSIGNED PA phenomenon" and the "don't need multihoming, just a /24" (actually anything from /23 to /26 may qualify). For the second one, if done by the LIR it may actually decrease the depletion rate (saving months lost with extra allocations). -- Radu-Adrian FEURDEAN fr.ccs
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Comment on IPv4 depletion rate for proposal 2015-05
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Comment on IPv4 depletion rate for proposal 2015-05
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]