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/[email protected]/
[address-policy-wg] 2019-05 New Policy Proposal (Revised IPv4 assignment policy for IXPs)
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2019-05 New Policy Proposal (Revised IPv4 assignment policy for IXPs)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2019-05 New Policy Proposal (Revised IPv4 assignment policy for IXPs)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Nikolas Pediaditis
npediaditi at ripe.net
Wed May 29 18:42:49 CEST 2019
Dear Nick, all, On 29 May 2019, at 15:41, Nick Hilliard <nick at foobar.org> wrote: > Could the NCC provide any stats on how many /22s have been assigned under the IXP assignment policy? Since September 2012, when the current IXP assignment policy came into effect, the RIPE NCC has issued 1x /22 and 3x /23 assignments to IXPs. Prior to this policy becoming active we had received specific requests from IXPs (for IP blocks not restricted to be used exclusively for their peering LANs). From these requests: - 23 were approved with a size of /23 - 1 with a size of /23,/24 - 9 with a size of /22 - 1 with a size of /23,/23,/24 Finally please note that, as some IXPs are also LIRs, they can use parts of their IPv4 allocations for their peering LANs (i.e. referring to some IP blocks larger than a /22 that have been mentioned in this thread). These are not considered as direct IXP assignments. I hope this helps. Kind regards, Nikolas Pediaditis Assistant Manager Registration Services & Policy Development RIPE NCC > On 29 May 2019, at 15:41, Nick Hilliard <nick at foobar.org> wrote: > > Denis Fondras wrote on 29/05/2019 14:11: >> On Wed, May 29, 2019 at 02:17:43PM +0200, Marco Schmidt wrote: >>> This proposal aims to increase the reserved IPv4 pool for IXPs to a >>> /15 and finetune assignment criteria. >>> You can find the full proposal at: https://www.ripe.net/participate/policies/proposals/2019-05 >> Just because of "It no longer provides for IXPs that need more than a >> /23 of IPv4 space" I am against this proposal. > > Could the NCC provide any stats on how many /22s have been assigned under the IXP assignment policy? > > /23 is 512 hosts, which is large by IXP standards. The PCH IXP directory suggests there are about 20 IXPs worldwide which are larger than 256 connected parties. > > Nick > > > -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/pkcs7-signature Size: 2640 bytes Desc: not available URL: </ripe/mail/archives/address-policy-wg/attachments/20190529/c229fe07/attachment.p7s>
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2019-05 New Policy Proposal (Revised IPv4 assignment policy for IXPs)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2019-05 New Policy Proposal (Revised IPv4 assignment policy for IXPs)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]