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/address-policy-wg@ripe.net/
[address-policy-wg] The final /8 policy proposals, part 3.2
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] The final /8 policy proposals, part 3.2
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] The final /8 policy proposals, part 3.2
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Sander Steffann
sander at steffann.nl
Tue Sep 15 09:48:37 CEST 2009
Hi Leo, >> We are talking about PA prefixes here, and this pool is only meant for >> initial allocations (PA), not PI. > > I know. Ok :) >> True. There might be organizations that become an LIR to get that >> initial /24 allocation. > > Has any work been done to identify what proportion of those organizations > that are normally satisfied with PI or PA assignments are likely to go for > a /24 PA "allocation" if that's all there is? I think some data > identifying likely outcomes would be useful when making deciding on the > prefix length to reserve. Hmmm. This is difficult. I don't think any of us has a crystal ball of that quality. My guess is that the only thing we can do is to reserve more addresses (a /10?) now. We can always decide to 'release' them later if it turns out that we reserved too many. Thanks, Sander
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] The final /8 policy proposals, part 3.2
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] The final /8 policy proposals, part 3.2
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]