On Mon, Sep 14, 2015, at 10:51, Peter Hessler wrote: > At my previous company, we joined RIPE as a LIR specifically because > there was no other way to get our own IPv4 address space. As a smaller > orginazation, we NEEDED to get our own IPv4 space to be multi-homed _and_ > to provide serivces to our users.
This is pretty much the situation at my present company. > I support the existing policy, and are very concerned with any proposal > that would encourage faster exhaustion of the IPv4 space. > > I respectfully disagree with the assertion that the existing last /8 > policy is painful for everyone.e It depends : if you need more than a /22 it is (very) painful, if you don't - it's not. And don't forget that some people are still arguing that the last /8 policy is to be used as a workaround until IPv6 becomes a useful option. Unfortunately, with the current stocks of available addresses, for a lot of people it doesn't work this way. -- Radu-Adrian FEURDEAN fr.ccs
