Hi Kai, > I don't see this either, hence, while I agree that there should be some > wording about the way the (already implicit) waiting list will be > implemented/handled, I reject the proposal as-is due to the reduction of the > assignment size. > > Reducing the assignment for new LIRs from /22 to /24 neither helps the > community, nor the late-coming LIR in question.
This presentation from RIPE NCC at RIPE77 shows that changing the allocation size does help significantly: https://ripe77.ripe.net/presentations/71-Andrea_Cima_RIPE_77_APWG.pdf slide 14. > IPv4 is gone, we pray every other minute, so we should act accordingly. Unfortunately the world is not as simple as that :'( Cheers, Sander
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP
