[address-policy-wg] 2011-03 New Policy Proposal (Post-depletion IPv4 address recycling)

Hi Remco,

On Tue, May 24, 2011 at 4:20 AM, Remco Van Mook
<Remco.vanMook at eu.equinix.com> wrote:
> Hi Martin,
>
> I'll try to answer the points you raised below:
>
> 1. This proposal does not impact transfer at all. Addresses that get
> transferred are at no point in that process 'returned to the RIPE NCC'.
>
> 2. It's not explicitly defined because it all depends on the address space
> returned. As I already indicated in another email, the long term effect of
> this is likely to be that all /8s managed by the RIPE NCC will have a
> minimum allocation size of a /22; and if we then run out of /22s or larger
> and need to hand out multiple smaller blocks (moving to clause 4) a few
> additional /8s might get *really* unlucky. But that will only happen when
> we're scraping the RIPE NCC barrel.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Remco
>

Thank you for the clarification. I'm satisfied with the above, which
is what I expected.

Thanks!

Best regards,
Martin