McTim said the following on 8/5/08 03:44:
Clearly, this proposal has downsides for our community. If we accept
this, then the last /8(s) given to AfriNIC by the IANA will be shared
by the other RIRs with higher burn rates (not likely that other RIRs
will be transferring address blocks to AfriNIC).
On that, selfish, basis alone, I oppose this policy proposal. In
addition, the language isn't what I would expect to see in a global
numbering policy, words like "petty sibling rivalry", "bickering" and
"whimpering" don't show the numbering community in a dignified light.
I agree with you, McTim.
It also implies that the RIR system doesn't work, and that the only
people who can distribute address space to LIRs is the IANA. That may
not be the intention, but that's clearly the message. :-(
BTW, this was thrown out of the APNIC region when proposed there, and
given that all RIR regions would have to support it, it isn't clear to
me why it is even being proposed here.
philip
--
_______________________________________________
rpd mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rpd
