On 11/29/2011 17:51, Mark Andrews wrote: > In message <4ED5720A.5020401@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Doug Barton writes: >> On 11/29/2011 15:37, Chris Grundemann wrote: >>> I support draft-weil-shared-transition-space-request and the >>> allocation of a /10 as Shared CGN Space because we are approaching >>> complete global exhaustion of unallocated IPv4 addresses and the value >>> of globally unique addresses is becoming manifest. >> >> As others have pointed out, those ideas contradict one another. The fact >> that free addresses are so valuable is precisely why they shouldn't be >> taken away from new entrants to the market in order to benefit the >> grasshoppers who've fiddled away the summer. And yes, I realize that >> 1,024 /20s is just a drop in the bucket. But sometimes the principle of >> the thing IS the thing. > > And if we had done this several years ago ... but we didn't. > we would have left even more space > to new comers as the RIR's could have use this space in assessing requests > for additional space. ISP that use this block could collectively return > much more space to the free pool than this will consume. ... and yet at this point we all know that noone who has substantial IPv4 space is going to return it to the RIRs. Doug -- "We could put the whole Internet into a book." "Too practical." Breadth of IT experience, and depth of knowledge in the DNS. Yours for the right price. :) http://SupersetSolutions.com/ _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf