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 11:58:54 CEST 2009
Hi Mark, > Would it be an option to have something written in the policy that means > the following? > The reserved /10 (or other range) from the last /8 RIPE NCC receives from > IANA is to be used for PA allocations. Whenever there are no other > addresses available to use for PI allocations the /10 (or part of > that)(that effective are the last IPv4 addresses RIPE NCC can provide to > the RIPE community at that time) can also be used for other allocations, > like PI. The problem with that is that the /10 would be used up in a *very* short time. I think we can get away (legally speaking) with not reserving any address space for separate organisations (PI), but I don't think we can get away with 'blocking the market' for new providers / LIRs (PA). Which is why I proposed to reserve space for PA initial allocations :) I could be wrong here ofcourse... 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 ]