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] 2019-02 New Policy Proposal (Reducing IPv4 Allocations to a /24)
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2019-02 New Policy Proposal (Reducing IPv4 Allocations to a /24)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2019-02 New Policy Proposal (Reducing IPv4 Allocations to a /24)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Randy Bush
randy at psg.com
Mon Feb 4 20:34:23 CET 2019
> But how tenable is it both in principle and in 'Internet governance' > terms for the NCC to collect fragmentlets of IPv4 and just sit on > them? not. many will have sharp edges. :) > So we need a policy to allocate them in a useful manner. > > The question before us is: What is the minimum useful allocation? today, that is a /24, as we all know. an experiment has shown issues with propagation of longer prefixes, no surprise. but, as i have suggested for some years, we will eventually have to remove that barrier. but this proposal just speaks to /24s. and it makes sense for now. randy
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2019-02 New Policy Proposal (Reducing IPv4 Allocations to a /24)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2019-02 New Policy Proposal (Reducing IPv4 Allocations to a /24)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]