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] RE: [ipv6-wg] additional IPv6 allocation (ripe-512 issues)
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] RE: [ipv6-wg] additional IPv6 allocation (ripe-512 issues)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2008-08 Policy Proposal Withdrawn (Initial Certification Policy in the RIPE NCC Service Region)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Brandon Daly
brandon.daly at zeninternet.co.uk
Tue Jul 19 19:07:03 CEST 2011
Hi, My understanding based on conversations with RIPE NCC is slightly different. The initial allocation is made based purely on number of subscribers, and does not take HD ratio into account. (I argued this extensively when applying for our initial allocation). This is more restrictive than the policies for obtaining an additional allocation. Bran. >Hi Ivan, > >> Let me try to understand: >> >> (A) We don't disagree that he might actually deserve more than /32 >> (B) According to my understanding of previous discussions I had on this topic, RIPE might actually have already reserved extra space >for his future needs >> (C) According to the current rules he can't get another /32 for a total of /31 without using most of the current /32 (and hoping his >next /32 will be adjacent) >> (D) Someone is seriously suggesting he returns the current /32 and asks for a brand new /31 which he will likely get. > >All correct. The current policy doesn't permit the RIPE NCC to give out extra address space for an existing allocation until the HD ratio >has been reached. They are allowed to give more than a /32 when someone requests a new allocation though. I have had this same issue and >I got the same answer. > >After reading the policies with this in mind I can only conclude that the RIPE NCC is implementing the policy correctly. If we want the >NCC to do something else someone has to write a policy proposal. > >Thanks, >Sander -- Brandon Daly Network Engineer, Zen Internet T: 0845 058 9030 F: 0845 058 9005 W: www.zen.co.uk Visit our new and improved Help & Support site - www.zen.co.uk/support A wealth of information from updating your contact details or tracking the status of your order to setting up a wireless network or configuring email accounts. This message is private and confidential. If you have received this message in error, please notify us and remove it from your system. Zen Internet Limited may monitor email traffic data and also the content of email for the purposes of security. Zen Internet Limited is registered in England and Wales, Sandbrook Park, Sandbrook Way, Rochdale, OL11 1RY Company No. 03101568 VAT Reg No. 686 0495 01
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] RE: [ipv6-wg] additional IPv6 allocation (ripe-512 issues)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2008-08 Policy Proposal Withdrawn (Initial Certification Policy in the RIPE NCC Service Region)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]