[db-wg] Re: [address-policy-wg] Draft: "status:" re-evaluation

Hi,

On Wed, Aug 13, 2003 at 03:08:57PM +0200, Shane Kerr wrote:
> In the meantime, we do not want to delay the implementation of the
> Sub-Allocation policy.  For that reason we'd like to have an interim
> status attribute value for that.

I like that.

> Proposal:
> 
> Add "SUB-ALLOCATED PA" to the allowed "status:" values.

That would be in agreement with the original proposal, so "I like that" 
(obviously).

> "SUB-ALLOCATED PA" inetnum object may have an "ALLOCATED PA" or an
> "LIR-PARTITIONED PA" less specific inetnum object.
> 
> A range of IP's can only have a single "SUB-ALLOCATED PA" in it.  That
> is, you cannot sub-allocate twice.

I wouldn't force that on anyone.  It might not always make sense, but
we have at least one reseller that has a re-selling customer - so a 
two-level structure is already in place.

So "please don't do that".

Gert Doering
        -- NetMaster
-- 
Total number of prefixes smaller than registry allocations:  56535  (56318)

SpaceNet AG                 Mail: netmaster at Space.Net
Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14   Tel : +49-89-32356-0
80807 Muenchen              Fax : +49-89-32356-299