North American Network Operators Group

Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical

Re: 240/4

  • From: David Barak
  • Date: Wed Oct 17 06:07:18 2007
  • Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024;; h=X-YMail-OSG:Received:Date:From:Subject:To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Message-ID; b=K1MaCnOJK+qM7N/ZZHY8UoVo5Qdnen83MU83A9arkeJpWgPrRS0ox9rJVkgSxpHK8VviRzcXn8mADL7kNVTdzaFAe4zIavJBwr1B7gYjhAmyynFRIhr7yGG/z4WeOw2/zj2DWEEvOyx7LSKwTBMg4N9DXi0MjpsOcn0dBCM6y18=;

--- "Justin M. Streiner" <[email protected]>
> I agree.  The current rate at which blocks of IPv4
> space are being 
> allocated to the RIRs suggests that releasing a
> chunk from, say, 240/5 or 
> 248/5 for consumption gets you about 1 year, tops.

How about releasing a /6 or two in /23 increments or
so with the idea of jumpstarting a market in IPv4
space explicitly stated?  

If clear title were granted (or at least clear 99-year
lease with transferability), that might be a far more
interesting IPv4 experiment than a lot of the
technical projects, which should probably be moved to
IPv6 by now (or if they haven't, would they please
hurry up?  I'd like more stuff to work).


David Barak
Need Geek Rock?  Try The Franchise:

Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around