Re: [sig-policy] prop-091: Limiting of final /8 policy to specific/9
Regards,
Naresh
Sent from my BlackBerry® smartphone from Tata Indicom
-----Original Message-----
From: Randy Bush <randy at psg dot com>
Sender: sig-policy-bounces at lists dot apnic dot net
Date: Sat, 22 Jan 2011 15:44:37
To: David Woodgate<dwoodgate5 at gmail dot com>
Cc: APNIC Policy SIG List<sig-policy at apnic dot net>
Subject: Re: [sig-policy] prop-091: Limiting of final /8 policy to specific
/9
> The premise of the proposal is:
> - Users want services now;
> - Services require IP addresses;
and there ain't gonna be no more. period. get over it.
this is like the loggers in the pacific northwest of the united states
arguing about the last trees. we should sacrifice the last resources
that our children may need for one year of jobs for a bunch of fracking
rednecks. how embarrassingly shortsighted and greedy.
if it turns out a few years from now that we don't really need the
trees, we can discuss it then. that's the thing about conservation.
you will note that the converse is not possible. unless, of course,
telstra wants to sign a contract with apnic that they will return a /9
should it be needed in the next decade or two.
randy
* sig-policy: APNIC SIG on resource management policy *
_______________________________________________
sig-policy mailing list
sig-policy at lists dot apnic dot net
http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy