The main issue here isn't the amount of IPs someone got by abusing the policy. Sure the 2‰ (0.2%) of 185/8 is negligible, but what would happen if we all did the same? Do you think you are the only ones needing IPs and you are the only ones who worry about their company survival?
On the other side, there a people who try to deploy IPv6 and try to overcome the IPv4 exhaustion. This is the way you should also move forward, instead of trying to get more "cheap" IPv4. Remember that for every single /22 you get by abusing the policy, you prohibit a new company to start business in the near future, since the required /22 won't be available any more. Apparently the proposal can't solve all the issues and can't block all kinds of abuse, but I believe it's in the right direction. George On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 8:28 AM, Jan Ingvoldstad <[email protected]> wrote: > On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 7:13 AM, Infinity Telecom SRL < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> Hello Fredy, >> >> >> Personally i dont understand this list, can you explain more ? >> > > As I understand it, his concern is that an organization with the same > contact person, "Bulavkin Ivan Aleksandrovitch", got allocated 30ish /22 > nets, nearly a /17, or around 2‰ (0.2%) of 185/8. > -- > Jan >
