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] We need IPv4 transfers
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] We need IPv4 transfers
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] We need IPv4 transfers
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Leo Vegoda
leo.vegoda at icann.org
Mon Jun 29 22:13:39 CEST 2015
Petr Umelov wrote: > Excuse me, /13. I am afraid you have misunderstood the policy. The policy requires allocation units defined as: "IPv4 allocation unit = 1/5 of Recovered IPv4 pool, rounded down to the next CIDR (power-of-2) boundary." with a /24 minimum. The result is that unless the pool size is increased so that it comprises five CIDR prefix equivalents, in which case it would be emptied in one go, the allocated prefixes will halve in size at each allocation period. You can grab the software to see what will be allocated next at: https://github.com/icann/ipv4-recovery-algorithm Kind regards, Leo Vegoda
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] We need IPv4 transfers
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] We need IPv4 transfers
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]