Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!


Prohibit to transfer 103/8 IPv4 reached agreement at APNIC.
New on LowEndTalk? Please Register and read our Community Rules.

All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.

Prohibit to transfer 103/8 IPv4 reached agreement at APNIC.

indiavpsindiavps Member
edited September 2017 in General

Moratorium on 103/8 transfers effective from 14 September 2017.
https://www.apnic.net/community/policy/proposals/prop-116/ (Version 006)

Well, I guess it's a good thing.

Thanked by 1Aidan

Comments

  • raindog308raindog308 Administrator, Veteran

    "This proposal helps to ensure the distribution of the ‘Final /8’ (103/8) block is consistent with its original purpose, for distribution for new entrants to the industry."

    indiavps said: Well, I guess it's a good thing.

    Isn't it the purpose of a market to allocate scarce resources, rather than a corrupt bureaucracy?

  • 103/3 means 103 X /8 ? or 103.0.0.0/8?

  • RhysRhys Member, Host Rep

    @WHT said:
    103/3 means 103 X /8 ? or 103.0.0.0/8?

    the latter.

    Thanked by 1WHT
  • raindog308raindog308 Administrator, Veteran

    WHT said: 103/3 means 103 X /8 ? or 103.0.0.0/8?

    That sound you heard was ColoCrossing management momentarily erupting in joy.

    "103 new /8s? WOO HOO! No need for ipv6 now..."

  • @raindog308 said:
    "This proposal helps to ensure the distribution of the ‘Final /8’ (103/8) block is consistent with its original purpose, for distribution for new entrants to the industry."

    Isn't it the purpose of a market to allocate scarce resources, rather than a corrupt bureaucracy?

    A market sometimes needs some "guidance" to not devolve into a monopoly.

  • On another note: this thing went through six revisions and no-one bothered to spellcheck it?!

  • raindog308raindog308 Administrator, Veteran

    ucxo said: A market sometimes needs some "guidance" to not devolve into a monopoly.

    Too late- we already have the RIRs :-)

  • FranciscoFrancisco Top Host, Host Rep, Veteran

    "Did not reach consensus at APNIC 43 and was returned to the author and the mailing list for further discussion."

    Francisco

  • raindog308 said: "103 new /8s? WOO HOO! No need for ipv6 now..."

    almost...soon™

  • MikePTMikePT Moderator, Patron Provider, Veteran

    @Francisco said:
    "Did not reach consensus at APNIC 43 and was returned to the author and the mailing list for further discussion."

    Francisco

    "14 September 2017 Version 6 of the proposal reached consensus at the APNIC 44 AMM."

  • Say what you will- they're still more decisive, and less expensive than the UN.

  • pbgbenpbgben Member, Host Rep

    Sooo, as a new "provider" we can get a slice™ of that?

Sign In or Register to comment.