Hi David, * David Monosov <[email protected]>
> The last /8 allocation criteria is there to ensure an orderly > transition is possible for as long as possible, and the fact we now > expect it to last longer than originally anticipated is further > demonstration of its efficacy. I'm not really certain if we can expect it to last longer than originally anticipated, even. I suppose it depends on what one anticipated in the first place. I anticipated (or hoped, rather) for a duration of about 10 years. The best analysis of its remaining lifetime that I'm aware of is the recently published RIPE Labs article¹ which suggests a remaining lifetime of approx. ~5½ years (and this includes future piecemeal allocations from IANA and expected returns from the membership). [1] https://labs.ripe.net/Members/wilhelm/ipv4-in-the-ripe-ncc-service-region-three-years-after-reaching-the-last-8 If accurate, that would mean the total lifetime of the somewhat misleadingly named «last /8» policy would end up being ~8½ years. 1½ years less than the 10 I had originally hoped for. There is no doubt that 2015-05 would reduce the remaining life expectancy of the «last /8» policy even further. Considering that the "last /8" is already expected to last for a shorter time than what I had hoped for, I cannot support 2015-05. Tore
