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] 2016-03 New Policy Proposal (Locking Down the Final /8 Policy)
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2016-03 New Policy Proposal (Locking Down the Final /8 Policy)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2016-03 New Policy Proposal (Locking Down the Final /8 Policy)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Aleksey Bulgakov
aleksbulgakov at gmail.com
Tue May 17 20:24:45 CEST 2016
5.1.4. All allocations will be marked in the RIPE database as ‘ALLOCATED FINAL’ Does it mean that all IPs from the 185./8 will be markead as ‘ALLOCATED FINAL’ or I am wrong? 2016-05-17 21:12 GMT+03:00 Roger Jørgensen <rogerj at gmail.com>: > On Tue, May 17, 2016 at 2:05 PM, Marco Schmidt <mschmidt at ripe.net> wrote: >> Dear colleagues, >> >> A new RIPE Policy proposal 2016-03, "Locking Down the Final /8 Policy" >> is now available for discussion. > > What really amaze me. We are using tons of time here in ag-wg talking > over IPv4 while there is not half that activity over in IPv6-wg. > > > I take that as a statement that everyone know everything there is to > know about IPv6, there are nothing more to discuss or learn, no > questions to ask, we are all using it so very few people are left > behind in IPv4 land... soon to be isolated island not able to talk > with anyone. > > ... is that how it is? > > > > Why aren't all of you with HUGE and MAJOR problem (sorry for the caps) > with lack of IPv4 address over in IPv6-wg bombing us with question on > how to get out of your current trouble? > Asking all kind of stupid and newbie questions? I'm very sure there > are tons of people standing in line to help you out. > > https://www.ripe.net/participate/ripe/wg/ipv6 > > > > > > PS 1 : chairs - I object to this policy and the other one trying to > sort a problem that can't be sorted in IPv4 land, only IPv6 can. > > > PS 2 : Nick Hillard summarized it very well here: > <start copy> > Like the curate's egg, this proposal is good in parts. Here's the good part: > >> - Explicitly state that the current IPv4 allocation policy applies to >> all available IPv4 address space held by the RIPE NCC that has not >> been reserved or marked to be returned to IANA > <end copy> > > -- > > Roger Jorgensen | ROJO9-RIPE > rogerj at gmail.com | - IPv6 is The Key! > http://www.jorgensen.no | roger at jorgensen.no > -- ---------- Best regards, Aleksey Bulgakov Tel.: +7 (926)690-87-29
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2016-03 New Policy Proposal (Locking Down the Final /8 Policy)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2016-03 New Policy Proposal (Locking Down the Final /8 Policy)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]