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] RE: [ipv6-wg] additional IPv6 allocation (ripe-512 issues)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Jan Zorz @ go6.si
jan at go6.si
Tue Jul 19 20:16:18 CEST 2011
On 7/19/11 7:55 PM, David Conrad wrote: > On Jul 18, 2011, at 9:38 PM, Jasper Jans wrote: >> The RIPE currently reserves a /29 for every initial /32. > > Is this really true? Well, from my source of information - yes (for legacy allocations). > When the RIRs and IANA were discussing the /12 > allocations, the RIRs claimed one of the reasons they needed /12s was > because they would all be using the "bisection method" of allocation > to remove the need for reservation. It would be sad to hear RIPE > still hadn't followed through. Again, from my source, since some months or maybe a year, RIPE-NCC allocates IPv6 on "bit-boundry" (or bisection) method, so reservation is not needed anymore. But legacy allocations made us think of /29 :) /jan
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] RE: [ipv6-wg] additional IPv6 allocation (ripe-512 issues)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] RE: [ipv6-wg] additional IPv6 allocation (ripe-512 issues)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]