[address-policy-wg] Re: [ipv6-wg] additional IPv6 allocation (ripe-512 issues)

On 7/20/11 6:30 PM, Leo Vegoda wrote:
> Hi Andrea,
>
> Your wrote:
>
>> According to our experience only LIRs that needed a block much
>> larger than /29 found it worth the effort to return their /32.
>
> I don't know how I should understand you statement. Should I take it
> to mean that the policy is impeding LIRs who would otherwise qualify
> for larger allocations from getting them because they will have to
> renumber their whole network? Or something else?

Idea...

If you are LIR that had no clue and got /32 but now when you know that 
you need more and can justify that, you could ask RIPE-NCC IPRA to get 
back your original /32, start looking into your justification under 
initial alloc policy and if you justify for anything up to (including) 
/29, IPRA allocates you justified block starting exactly where 
"returned" /32 started.

Problem solved, no need to renumber.

Do we need to put this into policy (if accepted) or would BCP work (as 
this can be best current practice :) )?

Cheers, Jan Zorz