Hi. I think it would be better to allocate /19 or bigger. It helps to go to IPv6 and the problem of IPv4 is resolved automatically. I don't really understand why the NCC tries to prolong the life of the dead patient by means of restrictions such as 2015-01, 2017-03 and others. It seems the NCC wants to earn money due to the IPs become more expensive.
So I oppose this proposal. 22 Сен 2017 г. 7:50 пользователь "Mikael Abrahamsson" <[email protected]> написал: On Thu, 21 Sep 2017, Tim Chown wrote: At the current run-rate, do we know what is the expected expiry of the free >> pool in RIPE's hands? >> > > There’s http://www.potaroo.net/tools/ipv4/. > There is also: https://www.ripe.net/publications/ipv6-info-centre/about- ipv6/ipv4-exhaustion/ipv4-available-pool-graph Looks to me that there is still IPv4 space being returned, the run-rate on 185/8 is constant, we have approximately 4-5 years to go? To me it looks like things are going according to plan, and I don't see any need to change anything. -- Mikael Abrahamsson email: [email protected]
