In message <6.2.5.6.2.20120209091221.082cb2f8@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, SM writes: > 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. > > >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. > > Regards, > -sm In none of the discussions I've seen has anyone proposed forcing ISP's to use this space. It is being provided as a alternative, the same away RFC 1918 space is offered as a alternative. Today you get ask "have you considered RFC 1918 space?" You can still get space even if RFC 1918 space would have worked. I suspect a similar question, will be part of allocation proceedures, for this space in the future. You need to know that the applicant is aware of this space. Mark -- Mark Andrews, ISC 1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 INTERNET: marka@xxxxxxx _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf