On Thu, Feb 9, 2012 at 10:59, SM <sm@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Hi Chris, > At 08:57 AM 2/9/2012, Chris Grundemann wrote: >> >> http://www.apnic.net/publications/news/2011/final-8 > > I am aware of the APNIC announcement. That's one out of five regions. My apologies, when you stated "I haven't seen any announcements about that." I thought you were not. Hopefully others found the link useful. >> Are you proposing that every ISP on the planet be given a /10 for >> inside CGN use, rather than one single /10 being reserved for this >> purpose? > > > No. > > If I am not mistaken, IPv4 assignments are on a needs basis. In my previous > comment, I mentioned that RIRs are still providing unique IPv4 assignments > to service providers that request IPv4 addresses. Even if the IANA pool was > not exhausted, it is unlikely that an ISP would get a /20 due to the > slow-start mechanism. In the ARIN region, slow-start only applies to new-to-ARIN organizations. Most (if not all) of the ISPs we're discussing here are established entities and are not subject to slow start. More to the point: I do not see giving everyone a unique bit of space for inside CGN use as an efficient solution to the problem. Likewise, waiting until we are completely out of IPv4 space before reacting to the problems that IPv4 free pool exhaustion WILL cause seems _very_ unlikely to produce positive results. Cheers, ~Chris > Regards, > -sm -- @ChrisGrundemann weblog.chrisgrundemann.com www.burningwiththebush.com www.theIPv6experts.net www.coisoc.org _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf