On 10/21/2015 3:08 PM, Tom Smyth wrote: > Point taken..Ciprian, however, just because a policy is difficult to police > doensnt mean that it is not a valid policy...
If it's difficult yes, but in my oppinion it would be impossible. > and i think practical policing options should be considered so that this > policy will help isps, without rewarding isps that have perhaps being > abusing loopholes. I think this would be helpful in aleviating IP > conservation Concerns Well, I've been working for ISPs and took care of the relation with ripe since about year 2000 so I don't think policies can ever be perfect. There will always be some that would find loopholes and exploit them. We should focus on what's really efficient. How to promote IPv6 deployment and how to convince the large operators to take the first steps towards it. According to some recent data (few days ago) that we have, there are 11668 organisations that hold ALLOCATED PA IPv4 resources in RIPE region. The number of LIRs is larger because some of them have already sold the resources so they are no longer relevant. >From theese, the top 1% PA resource holders (117 organisations) have allocations totalling 363,535,872 IPs out of the total 575,180,544 ALLOCATED PA IPs in RIPE region. (that is 63.20%) If the remaining 99% percent would fully deploy IPv6 then the region's average would be at 36.80%, which would not be enough to make us forget about IPv4. Therefore, in my oppinion, this is not a problem that can be solved by the many but by the few top providers. Think about policies that would "drive them to drive us all" towards IPv6 adoption. That would really help. Ciprian
