Re: [sig-policy] prop-085: Eligibility for critical infrastructureassign
> IPv4) has any relevance or validity when we reach that last cup of
> B) There is still CI space, and some time left (granted not a lot)
> for those budding CI organisations to get their act together and
> acquire their IPv4 while its still easy to justify based on that
> magic keyword "CI". (irrespective of whose mathematics to know what
> is the last /8 is used)
as if there was any critical infrastructure that actually needs golden
addresses. golden addresses are for when dns can not work.
> C) As noted in the Prop-62 discussions. 'The Last' really does mean
> THE LAST. I find it bizarre that we are trying to establish these
> corner cases that allows a little group of not-yet-existing
> organisations a side door based on very very little data nor analysis
> to back it up.
welcome to amateur policy hour
> Apologies for the frankness of this next line, but it sounds like
> policy for policy sake.
these days, most proposals look like that to me