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] "last /8" allocation size - community feedback request before engaging PDP
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] "last /8" allocation size - community feedback request before engaging PDP
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] "last /8" allocation size - community feedback request before engaging PDP
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Sascha Luck [ml]
apwg at c4inet.net
Mon Sep 14 15:09:09 CEST 2015
On Mon, Sep 14, 2015 at 09:17:04AM +0200, Radu-Adrian FEURDEAN wrote: >Before submitting the proposal we would like to have some community >feedback on several aspects : My thoughts: 1) anything that increases the bureaucracy required to deal with the NCC for a first allocation is a non-goer. 2) I could live with giving a LIR which has only received an "austerity /22" another shot after a certain time, but I'd couple it with some proof of ipv6 deployment (beyond just advertising a /32) 3) The edge case of a LIR not needing the full /22 can be handled by the transfer market. If you still think you don't need the other three /24s after 24 months, sell them. rgds, Sascha Luck
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] "last /8" allocation size - community feedback request before engaging PDP
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] "last /8" allocation size - community feedback request before engaging PDP
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]