[address-policy-wg] 2012-01 New Policy Proposal (Inter-RIR IPv4 Address Transfers)

On 04/03/2012 11:56 AM, Sascha Luck wrote:
> sure, but a minimum allocation may be larger than the sum of the assignments - that doesn't mean the NCC can

we seem to have diverging understandings of 'minimum' here...

> reclaim part of that allocation - or can it?

i'd say this is one of the many cases i can imagine/construct where that wouldn't make much sense...
(and i'm personally more interested in relevant cases, forgive me if i won't spend much more effort on this - if you want you could e.g. also think about increasing the minimum prefixlength for bgp for this purpose)

> one might as well make a policy that required the return of unused allocation parts.

that's the current situation, and it's being done by ncc (surprisingly where it makes sense ;).

regards,

	Chris