Re: [sig-policy] prop-091: Limiting of final /8 policy to specific /9
Perhaps this is exactly why we should use the ones we have?
> 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.
Aside from the loggers; there are also folks who need homes, kids who
need textbooks, etc.
Also, when trees are cut down and consequently cut up, there is no
longer a tree (i.e. strapping 2x4s together does not a tree make).
However, issuing a slot in a database (allocating or assigning IPv4
addresses) does not in any way change the underlying resource. IPv4
addresses are not forever lost when put into use, they are however *in
use* and thus providing benefit to the entire community.
> 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.
Conservation is of course one necessary piece of sustainability but
keeping a huge pile of lumber behind my house (just in case) until it
is rotten and unusable really doesn't benefit anyone, despite my
intentions. On the other hand, if I calculate how much lumber I need
and set that much aside (and maybe a bit more to be safe), then I
actually have protected my future, without undue waste.
¥0.02
~Chris (speaking as someone who recycles both wood and IP addresses)