[address-policy-wg] 2015-03 New Draft Document and Impact Analysis Published (Assessment Criteria for IPv6 Initial Allocation Size)

Hi Tore,

On 12.07.2015 08:54, Tore Anderson wrote:
> Hi Jens,
> 
> * Opteamax GmbH
> 
>> as far as I am informed each V6- allocation made by RIPE had always a
>> "reserved" space after the actual allocation which allows "extending"
>> upto /27 ... so returning seems not to be necassary ... at least not
>> as long as /27 is sufficient.
> 
> Actually, the reservation is for a /29. That's precisely the reason why
> the 6RD proposal allowed for extension up to that exact size:

for a customer, I had a request for a /28 opened recently and were
offered to start with a /29 and maybe resize it to /28 depending on
outcome of 2015-03. I asked back if "resize" means new allocation so
renumbering and received the following reply for RIPE-Staff:

> We actually reserve 3 bits for each allocation so in future if
> needed your user would have access up to a /26.

I just downloaded
ftp://ftp.ripe.net/ripe/dbase/split/ripe.db.inet6num.gz and grep'ed for /29

$ grep "/29" ripe.db.inet6num | sort

I did not validate each and every line, but paged thru the output and it
actually seems that the allocations made are all with a following
reserved space that they can be grown upto /26:

inet6num:       2a06:d00::/29
inet6num:       2a06:d40::/29
inet6num:       2a06:d80::/29
inet6num:       2a06:dc0::/29
inet6num:       2a06:e00::/29
inet6num:       2a06:e40::/29
inet6num:       2a06:e80::/29
inet6num:       2a06:ec0::/29
inet6num:       2a06:f00::/29
inet6num:       2a06:f40::/29
inet6num:       2a06:f80::/29
inet6num:       2a06:fc0::/29



Sorry in my last mail I remembered wrongly that it was /27 instead of /26

BR
Jens


-- 
Opteamax GmbH - RIPE-Team
Jens Ott

Opteamax GmbH

Simrockstr. 4b
53619 Rheinbreitbach

Tel.:  +49 2224 969500
Fax:   +49 2224 97691059
Email: jo at opteamax.de

HRB: 23144, Amtsgericht Montabaur
Umsatzsteuer-ID.: DE264133989