Re: Internic address allocation policy (fwd)

[Kim Hubbard <kimh () internic net>]

>
Now that we've established that I don't have fangs or horns (thanks to
Chris and Matt for clearing that up :-)) I would like to urge you all
to join the IRE mailing list to discuss the IP polices.

Please remember that the IP policies are meant to be constantly evolving
and improving.  The current policies are definitely not popular and
the IP registries like them least of all.  However, until other options
are available we're stuck with them.  So, we need everyone to work 
together on coming up with alternatives to the allocation polices that
will satisfy each of us as well as the limitations on IPv4.

All I ask is that instead of just complaining about the policies, you
offer valid alternatives at the same time.

Thanks,
-Kim


> Hi,
>
> > So, my question is: What can we do to make it better? Not "What can Kim
> > Hubbard do to fix it", and not "What can those stupid ISP's do to fix it",
> > but what can both do collaboratively to work out a consistent method of
> > doing things, and making sure that it's well known to both new existing
> > providers of network solutions.
>
> Just FYI: there will be an Internet Address Registry Evolution (yes,
> we'll be coming up with a new name) working group meeting at the San
> Jose IETF that is chartered to try to come up with ways of evolving
> the IP address allocation policies.  It will be on Monday at 7:30 PM.
> Note we aren't touching domain name issues and I'd really like to not
> have it turn into a "bash your favorite registry" session either.
>
> Regards,
> -drc

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -