This archive is retained to ensure existing URLs remain functional. It will not contain any emails sent to this mailing list after July 1, 2024. For all messages, including those sent before and after this date, please visit the new location of the archive at https://mailman.ripe.net/archives/list/[email protected]/
[address-policy-wg] Draft: "status:" re-evaluation
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] RIPE NCC Services
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Draft: "status:" re-evaluation
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Shane Kerr
shane at ripe.net
Wed Aug 13 15:08:57 CEST 2003
All, We recently proposed changes to the "status:" attribute values in the RIPE Database: http://www.ripe.net/ripe/draft-documents/status-attributes.html We have received input from APNIC on the subject. They proposed a simpler layout, and we think their suggestion makes sense. However, we would like to go forward with a slightly modified version that incorporates the "organisation" object we are working on. In the meantime, we do not want to delay the implementation of the Sub-Allocation policy. For that reason we'd like to have an interim status attribute value for that. Proposal: Add "SUB-ALLOCATED PA" to the allowed "status:" values. "SUB-ALLOCATED PA" inetnum object may have an "ALLOCATED PA" or an "LIR-PARTITIONED PA" less specific inetnum object. A range of IP's can only have a single "SUB-ALLOCATED PA" in it. That is, you cannot sub-allocate twice. -- Shane Kerr RIPE NCC
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] RIPE NCC Services
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Draft: "status:" re-evaluation
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]