Just to add my contribution...
Izumi Okutani said the following on 27/9/07 22:30:
Encouraging investment in developing countries by large ISPs in
developed countries?
:-) I understand your point, but I imagine a single /8 won't attract too
many investors. It probably won't last for more than few months to meet
their needs.
Well, the investors I can think of are those who will set up business
(probably no more than a shell) in another RIR region just so they can
get IPv4 address space for their business in the region which has no
more IPv4 address space. Multinationals tend to have one RIR membership
but network needs covering multiple RIR regions. So this isn't unusual.
I know quite a number of people are concerned about this point, so I'd
be interested to hear more details on what people see as an issue.
I think a good start would be that each RIR region should document what
should happen to the last /8. Then the process can be a "if you give us
a /8 we have a policy which describes what we are going to do with it".
It sounds a lot more realistic than the current "give us a /8 and we
promise we'll use it for special needs only". We have not defined the
latter in policy anywhere. And if no policy has been defined for this
/8, the fall-back position would be the existing policies, which could
easily see one LIR come and gobble up the whole lot in one swoop.
Meaning we have spent all this effort for nothing.
philip
--
* sig-policy: APNIC SIG on resource management policy *
_______________________________________________
sig-policy mailing list