Martin, > Do you think that most of those "new" LIRs are in fact a new players? As long > as we are allowed to transfer those addresses, we cannot be sure about that. >
These "new LIRs" I consider "already in business", they do not fall into the category I was discussing. > Also life isn't fair. There are LIRs with large legacy IPv4 blocks, which > could sustain a few dosents LIRs in current policy, but hay, that's the way > it > is. They got their pools fairly/legaly as well as we are getting it now. > What I called "unfair" was the assumption that "real" new players were happy with starting (and maintaining) a legacy IPv4 network today. Sorry if I was not clear. > Unability to getting IPv4 from RIPE doesn't mean unability to get IPv4 > conectivity. > I agree. Denis
