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/address-policy-wg@ripe.net/
[address-policy-wg] 2014-04 New Draft Document and Impact Analysis Published (Relaxing IPv6 Requirement for Receiving Space from the Final /8)
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2014-04 New Draft Document and Impact Analysis Published (Relaxing IPv6 Requirement for Receiving Space from the Final /8)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2014-04 New Draft Document and Impact Analysis Published (Relaxing IPv6 Requirement for Receiving Space from the Final /8)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Sander Steffann
sander at steffann.nl
Thu Sep 11 10:56:13 CEST 2014
Hi Aleksi, > The definition we had written is as follows: > > [O]rganisations are eligible to receive an allocation from the final /8 if they have an inet6num object registered in the RIPE Database or any of the other RIR databases mirrored by the RIPE NCC. Be careful of tying policy to implementation details. Not all RIRs use the same data model and rules for their databases. i.e. ARIN whois != ARIN IRR. Another example: if one of the RIRs at some point would become the/a registry for ULA-C then there will be inet6num objects for ULA space, which would fulfil your requirement. Cheers, Sander
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2014-04 New Draft Document and Impact Analysis Published (Relaxing IPv6 Requirement for Receiving Space from the Final /8)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2014-04 New Draft Document and Impact Analysis Published (Relaxing IPv6 Requirement for Receiving Space from the Final /8)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]