On Fri, Apr 22, 2016, at 18:00, Nick Hilliard wrote:
Radu-Adrian FEURDEAN wrote:
I do understand that. I just do not agree with the "as long as possible, no matter what" approach. For me, the issue is that right now we are in a "please suffer, the solution is not working yet" situation.
and your solution is that you want future market entrants to suffer more than you're suffering now because there will be no address space whatsoever left for them?
They will eventually do it anyway. And I really don't belive that with the new proposal it will be in 18 months whereas with the current one it will be in more than 5 years. Those being said, historically, many new (small) entrants were not becoming LIRs from day 1. They were usually starting with some space from an existing LIR, some of them going multihomed with that space, and only then becoming LIR and having "their own space". The transfer market is discouraging this, and the limited space is also pushing many of them to become LIR not because they really want to, but because some upstream providers encourage them to do so in order to save their own space ("wanna /24 - become LIR"). -- Radu-Adrian FEURDEAN fr.ccs