Dr. Mueller,
I don't believe the IP market would adequately price in the more distant but
negative effects of CGN, in much the same way that the price of automotive
fuel doesn't adequately price in the environmental effects of vehicles on
the road or that smoking has on health care costs.
Frank
On Mon, Dec 22, 2014 at 4:27 PM, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:
> I would support a call for no needs testing on IPv6 allocations. Of course
> once obtained then it would be the end users problem to get their upstream
> to route it. But if more end users obtained IPv6 then it would increase the
RPKI
Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:
[...]
> Europe can get away with ripe-604 precisely because a) it has no Legacy
> IPv4
Looking at the most recent copy of
ftp://ftp.ripe.net/ripe/dbase/split/ripe.db.inetnum.gz I see 40,557
registrations with a status of "LEGACY".
> and b) a lot of it has switched ove
On Mon, 22 Dec 2014 19:57:22 +
Milton L Mueller wrote:
Please. Will all the amateur economists announcing that markets don't work for finite resources take a look at
a) radio spectrum auctions
:RANT ON:
Absolutely. If your in a truly lightly populated rural part of the country the
rad
So far there has been very little discussion on this policy.
Therefore, as one of the AC shepherds for this policy I would like to
initiate some discussion of this policy. Here are a few questions for
the ARIN community to think about and provide feedback on;
- The current CI reservation is
Milton,
"Ipv4 number markets are here. They are not going away unless scarcity
goes away"
IPv4 scarcity is going to go away. It's coming a lot faster than most
people think. IPv6 is being rammed down a lot of people's throat who
don't realize it.
You buy a shiny new Comcast Xfinity circu
Didn't your mommy ever teach you that just because Europe does something
doesn't mean you need to do it also?
You cannot have it both ways. ARIN exists as a regulatory body. If
it's usefulness as a regulatory body is over then call for it's
dissolution. Otherwise, it's going to do what it
Another "Freewill" by Rush fan, I see ;-) Your dating yourself...
An IP address adjacency is no guarantee anymore that the devices are in
the same room.
I can put 198.199.199.191 in Chicago and purchase a layer 2 circuit to
Denver and put 198.199.199.192 on that.
Please don't perpetuat
> On Dec 22, 2014, at 11:57 , Milton L Mueller wrote:
>
> Please. Will all the amateur economists announcing that markets don't work
> for finite resources take a look at
>
> a) radio spectrum auctions
Yes, this is an excellent proof of the dysfunction of markets for finite
resources! Thank
It's almost gone now 6 to 12 months tops until runout unless some significant
event occurs. As it will take six months probably to make a major change to
the affected policies. Why not start now?
Steven L Ryerse
President
100 Ashford Center North, Suite 110, Atlanta, GA 30338
770.656.1460 -
On 12/22/14, 13:57 , Milton L Mueller wrote:
Please. Will all the amateur economists announcing that markets don't work for
finite resources take a look at
a) radio spectrum auctions
b) land/real estate markets
c) ipv4 numbers in RIPE region, where needs tests for transfers were basically
abo
Folks -
We have a large number of draft policies currently underway
(see https://www.arin.net/policy/proposals/ for details)
Perhaps we could have some discussion (on the PPML Mailing
List) of merits of these, and/or suggestions for improving the policy
text where appropriate?
Thanks!
Hi Rob,
Sorry, I did not mean to imply that it was you who used the word troll or
other objectionable words.
But by pointing out what you did on a public list, you crossed the line IMO.
If you think I crossed a line calling you out, so be it, I've expressed
myself completely on the issue.
R
"Mike Burns" writes:
> I'm uncomfortable with what Mr. Seastrom did there, choosing the
> example he did.
> As a community we strive to be inclusive, and one way to stifle
> conversation is to go ad hominem, even if obliquely.
The irony of being called out personally and accused of making an
ad
Please. Will all the amateur economists announcing that markets don't work for
finite resources take a look at
a) radio spectrum auctions
b) land/real estate markets
c) ipv4 numbers in RIPE region, where needs tests for transfers were basically
abolished
d) stock markets (there are a fixed numb
> On Dec 21, 2014, at 15:48 , Mike Burns wrote:
>
> Hi Owen,
>
> 2014-14 calls for a /16 limit.
> You expect some organization to advertise they will buy a /16, and then just
> change names and prosecute a series of transactions, each requiring a new
> ORG-ID. You know, there are a growing gr
I'm uncomfortable with what Mr. Seastrom did there, choosing the example he
did.
As a community we strive to be inclusive, and one way to stifle conversation
is to go ad hominem, even if obliquely.
I hope we don't see more of that kind of thing on this list, nor language
about trolls or whatnot.
Steven Ryerse writes:
> Well Rob, we would have both of our name servers on topologically
> distinct networks but ARIN denied our small IPv4 allocation request!
Topologically distinct means not sharing facilities or upstreams.
Think off-site, on the other coast, or out-of-country, on networks n
18 matches
Mail list logo
