8 May
2012
8 May
'12
7:09 p.m.
Alright then, for the sake of argument I'll oppose until I see some convincing numbers. Back in the original last /8 discussion the rationale for choosing a /22 was that it would get us about 16k final allocations, or 1 for every NCC member and room for the membership to double in size. we need to move away from this idea of how to expand the RIPE NCC membership and think more in terms of how to serve the RIPE community.
while i definitely agree with your statement, i that is not how i took remco's comment. i see the final /8 policy (i as an author of the equivalent in apnic) as a fairness issue, trying to ensure there is space for new entrants, after we old hogs gobbled so much of it up. randy