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] Final consensus on 2015-01: Alignment of Transfer Requirements for IPv4 Allocations
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Final consensus on 2015-01: Alignment of Transfer Requirements for IPv4 Allocations
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Final consensus on 2015-01: Alignment of Transfer Requirements for IPv4 Allocations
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Leo Vegoda
leo.vegoda at icann.org
Wed Jul 22 18:04:05 CEST 2015
Hi Petr, Petr Umelov wrote: [...] > > Petr Umelov was under the impression that RIPE NCC receives > > a fixed size IPv4 block from IANA every 6 months, which is not > > correct as pointed out by Leo Vegoda. > > But the RIPE NCC receives a fixed size. But you don't consider it. I do not understand what you mean. Can you please explain? In May 2014 the RIRs each received the equivalent of a /11. That dropped to a /12 in September 2014 and a /13 or equivalent in March 2015. Regards, Leo Vegoda
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Final consensus on 2015-01: Alignment of Transfer Requirements for IPv4 Allocations
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Final consensus on 2015-01: Alignment of Transfer Requirements for IPv4 Allocations
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]