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] Is the final /8 the correct term ? - semi off track to the 2013-03 discussion..
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Is the final /8 the correct term ? - semi off track to the 2013-03 discussion..
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Is the final /8 the correct term ? - semi off track to the 2013-03 discussion..
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Hans Petter Holen
hph at oslo.net
Fri Jul 26 18:47:13 CEST 2013
On Thursday, July 25, 2013, Tore Anderson wrote: > * Erik Bais > > > If you think that the pool which we have left is only the final /8 that > > we are working into currently (185.x.y.z) I think that the assumption is > > incorrect. > > It is incorrect indeed. This is one of the rather confusing things about > our current policy that 2013-03 aims to improve. Under 2013-03, the > phase "the last /8" is completely purged from the policy language. Which I belive is a good thing. > > There is still space left at IANA Yes roughly a /8 in bits an pieces according to IANA management at the last ICANN meeting. > > and once the first RIR reaches below > > their /9 mark of their final /8 … from my understanding it is , that > > also that space is going to be allocated to the RIR’s . > > > > Also there will be reclaimed space from 2007-01 and closing LIR’s > > (forced or by people their own decision) and also that space all goes > > back into the same pool. > > Both these statements are correct. Is it really? If we remove the needs based criteria will it then be returned to the NCC or put up for sale? Hans Petter -- Hans Petter Holen Mobile +47 45 06 60 54 | hph at oslo.net | http://hph.oslo.net -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: </ripe/mail/archives/address-policy-wg/attachments/20130726/cde01694/attachment.html>
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Is the final /8 the correct term ? - semi off track to the 2013-03 discussion..
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Is the final /8 the correct term ? - semi off track to the 2013-03 discussion..
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]