> From: "David R. Conrad" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> More realistically, some might consider IPv4 address allocation
> policies as discouraging the growth of the Internet (I am not among
> them)
> ...
** > Most, if not all, of the same people who are refused IPv4 address
** > allocations will (or should if we expect not to re-create the swamp) be
** > refused allocations of IPv6 addresses.
Holy smoke! That's really major.
This is the first I've heard of this (although it makes technical sense to
try and avoid unaggregable allocations). I hadn't realized the registries
were trying to guard against routing table bloat as well as address space
exhaustion. I'm curious, when did this start, and how was it decided?
Wow.
Noel
