<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=utf-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
Good Morning Remco, Good Morning List,<br>
<br>
with all respect I don't see a "remarkable success" in current last
/8 policy.<br>
We are dealing with the same amount of space as September 2012 that
in the meanwhile has been abused in several ways and there are
really no incentives to IPv6 adoption.<br>
<br>
There was only one requirement to obtain one IPv4 /22: request and
obtain at least from /32 IPv6 to a maximum of /29 IPv6.<br>
Am I wrong or this requirement has been removed?!?! Please explain
that to a new entrant...<br>
What does it mean? "we are running out. here your crumbs, sorry we
have no solution" ?!?<br>
<br>
If for you last /8 policy is a success to me IPv6 incentives
policies looks absent. We completly failed from this point of view.<br>
If you look at this where IPv4 exhaustion took place IPv6 is
strongly gowing:
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.google.com/intl/en/ipv6/statistics.html#tab=per-country-ipv6-adoption&tab=per-country-ipv6-adoption">https://www.google.com/intl/en/ipv6/statistics.html#tab=per-country-ipv6-adoption&tab=per-country-ipv6-adoption</a><br>
<br>
I think this policy is not for faster exhaustion but for "farier
exhaustion" and is offering a path to go over IPv4 while still
needing it to grow.<br>
<br>
kind regards<br>
Riccardo<br>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">Il 15/04/2016 00:50, remco van mook ha
scritto:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAJ--xAXN=q4D_baemPV+ogUg1vQ8Eut1d0fFL0A7PszYczVEuw@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">Dear colleagues,
<div><br>
</div>
<div>I'd like to reiterate my objection to this proposal. Anyone
who thinks another block of 1,000 addresses is going to help
them float their business is in my opinion delusional (because
the next step would be an extra 2,000, then 4,000, ..). The
problem is not that you're getting a /22 - the problem is that
we're out of space, never to come back. I also object to the
notion that new entrants who joined the game recently have any
more entitlement than new entrants 2 years from now. </div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>The final /8 policy in the RIPE region has been, in my
opinion, a remarkable success because there's actually still
space left to haggle about. What does need fixing is the fact
that there are a few obvious loopholes that are now being used
to contravene the intention of the policy, and are being used
as a rationale for this proposal. </div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Kind regards,</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Remco</div>
<div>(no hats)</div>
<div><br>
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div dir="ltr">On Thu, Apr 14, 2016 at 2:43 PM Marco Schmidt
<<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:mschmidt@ripe.net">mschmidt@ripe.net</a>>
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">Dear
colleagues,<br>
<br>
The Discussion Period for the policy proposal 2015-05,
"Last /8<br>
Allocation Criteria Revision" has been extended until 13
May 2016.<br>
<br>
The goal of this proposal is to allow LIRs to request an
additional /22<br>
IPv4 allocation from the RIPE NCC every 18 months.<br>
<br>
The text of the proposal has been revised based on mailing
list feedback<br>
and we have published a new version (2.0) today. As a
result, a new<br>
Discussion Phase has started for the proposal.<br>
<br>
Some of the differences from version 1.0 include:<br>
- Additional /22 IPv4 allocations can be only provided
from address<br>
space outside 185/8<br>
- Only LIRs with less than a /20 in total are eligible to
receive<br>
additional allocations<br>
- LIRs must document their IPv6 deployment as part of the
request<br>
<br>
You can find the full proposal at:<br>
<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://www.ripe.net/participate/policies/proposals/2015-05"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://www.ripe.net/participate/policies/proposals/2015-05</a><br>
<br>
We encourage you to review this policy proposal and send
your comments<br>
to <<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:address-policy-wg@ripe.net" target="_blank">address-policy-wg@ripe.net</a>>.<br>
<br>
Regards,<br>
<br>
Marco Schmidt<br>
Policy Development Officer<br>
RIPE NCC<br>
<br>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
<div class="moz-signature">-- <br>
<pre>Ing. Riccardo Gori
e-mail: <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:rgori@wirem.net">rgori@wirem.net</a>
Mobile: +39 339 8925947
Mobile: +34 602 009 437
Profile: <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://it.linkedin.com/in/riccardo-gori-74201943">https://it.linkedin.com/in/riccardo-gori-74201943</a>
</pre>
<img src="cid:part4.03010400.00020100@wirem.net" width="200">
<pre>WIREM Fiber Revolution
Net-IT s.r.l.
Via Cesare Montanari, 2
47521 Cesena (FC)
Tel +39 0547 1955485
Fax +39 0547 1950285
--------------------------------------------------------------------
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
This message and its attachments are addressed solely to the persons
above and may contain confidential information. If you have received
the message in error, be informed that any use of the content hereof
is prohibited. Please return it immediately to the sender and delete
the message. Should you have any questions, please contact us by re-
plying to <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:info@wirem.net">info@wirem.net</a>
Thank you
WIREM - Net-IT s.r.l.Via Cesare Montanari, 2 - 47521 Cesena (FC)
--------------------------------------------------------------------
</pre>
</div>
</body>
</html>