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] 2019-07 New Policy Proposal (Default assignment size for IXPs)
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2019-07 New Policy Proposal (Default assignment size for IXPs)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2019-07 New Policy Proposal (Default assignment size for IXPs)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Radu-Adrian FEURDEAN
ripe-wgs at radu-adrian.feurdean.net
Wed Nov 13 20:52:37 CET 2019
On Wed, Nov 13, 2019, at 15:04, Scott Leibrand wrote: > Isn’t that as simple as “use sparse allocation”? As long as less than > half of the remaining IXP pool has been used up, everyone can be given > an allocation within a larger block with the ability to grow at least > 2x. If "sparse allocation" is the magic word, it's OK for me. -- Radu-Adrian FEURDEAN
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2019-07 New Policy Proposal (Default assignment size for IXPs)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2019-07 New Policy Proposal (Default assignment size for IXPs)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]