Re: [arin-ppml] Draft Policy ARIN-2017-5: Equalization of Assignment Registration requirements between IPv4 and IPv6

2017-07-18 Thread joel jaeggli
On 7/18/17 22:23, Owen DeLong wrote: > >> On Jul 17, 2017, at 16:36 , John Curran wrote: >>> What I would like to know is my gut feeling correct, which is that after >>> receiving an allocation of IPv6, nearly nobody ever returns to the well for >>> more, or at least not like it was back in th

Re: [arin-ppml] Draft Policy ARIN-2014-12: Anti-hijack Policy

2014-04-06 Thread joel jaeggli
On 3/28/14, 9:57 AM, Bill Buhler wrote: > So if my understanding is correct, they basically performed a routing > man in the middle attack on live IPv6 prefixes. Pardon my > understanding level, but how did they keep from creating routing > loops and service interruptions. I'm also a little concern

Re: [arin-ppml] Bootstrapping new entrants after IPv4 exhaustion

2013-11-23 Thread joel jaeggli
On 11/22/13, 2:32 PM, CJ Aronson wrote: > This is why RIPE and APNIC both have their last /8 policy. Anyone can > get a /22 once out of the last /8 (til there are no more). Both are now > signing up tons of new customers. Both are generating a large amount > of revenue. The small guys can all