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] IPv4 waiting list policy
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] IPv4 waiting list policy
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] IPv4 waiting list policy
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Jan Ingvoldstad
frettled at gmail.com
Fri Dec 10 06:52:05 CET 2021
On Wed, Dec 8, 2021 at 7:41 PM Randy Bush <randy at psg.com> wrote: > >>> C) IPv4 waiting list priority follows the size of existing > >>> allocations for the LIR. The lower amount of allocations, starting > >>> with zero, the higher the priority. > >> > >> if the purpose of new allocations is to allow entry, why would an LIR > >> with any existing allocation be given more? > > > > That would only happen if there are zero new entrants, as an LIR with any > > existing allocation would have a lower priority on the waiting list. > > i asked why, not how. imiho, the list should be for *new* entrants, > period. > If there are no new entrants, why should any available netblocks be kept unavailable for entrants who request additional netblocks? Not that I think it will ever happen ... -- Jan -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: </ripe/mail/archives/address-policy-wg/attachments/20211210/cd537436/attachment.html>
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] IPv4 waiting list policy
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] IPv4 waiting list policy
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]