Hi Sanjeev bhai :) always good to hear from you. On Wed, 9 Aug 2023 at 13:48, Sanjeev Gupta <[email protected]> wrote:
> Shaila, > > I oppose this, but not because of its details. > > We (Operators) cannot have it both ways. We have been screaming that IPv4 > is over, since at least 2011. Slicing it finer extends the pain, as well > as demonstrates to everyone that IPv4 is still a valuable, and required, > commodity. > You know that I absolutely don't disagree with this point, as someone who started the IPv6 Task Force PK 15yrs still very much enthusiastic about the "IPv6 only" world but the reality is that it's not going to happen most likely in my lifetime. Whether we like it or not, IPv4 is still required and we just have to make best use of the remaining resources. As you are very much aware of the situation in this region, most likely ten or so IXPs in the next decade will use /26 or /25 allocations under this policy but probably another 10 or so will take the benefit of /22 allocations for expansion. For the later, the only way for them to expand is to get/purchase resources from the open market. This policy is actually giving away IPv4 addresses to those who needs it and get over with it. > > Issue what we have. Then stop. Let us not micromanage this. > A little bit more micro-management for a few more years and we will be over with the last /8. Last time I did the forecast it was around 2025/26 when we were running out of it, this policy will not change that. > > > -- > Sanjeev Gupta > +65 98551208 http://sg.linkedin.com/in/ghane > Regards, Aftab A. Siddiqui
_______________________________________________ SIG-policy - https://mailman.apnic.net/[email protected]/ To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
