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]/
[ipv6-wg] De-aggregation of assigned IPv6 prefixes?
- Previous message (by thread): [ipv6-wg] Re: [address-policy-wg] IPv6 prefixes / PI
- Next message (by thread): [ipv6-wg] Re: [address-policy-wg] Re: 200 customer requirements for IPv6
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Gert Doering
gert at space.net
Tue Dec 6 08:41:24 CET 2005
Hi, On Tue, Dec 06, 2005 at 12:46:57AM +0100, Jeroen Massar wrote: > http://www.ripe.net/ripe/docs/ipv6policy.html#initial_criteria > reads amongst others: > 8<------------------- > c) plan to provide IPv6 connectivity to organisations to which it will > assign /48s by advertising that connectivity through its single > aggregated address allocation > -------------------->8 > > According to the above, after the /48, can one announce more specifics > or should/must one not do this? (*) When this came up last time, the explanation was "it is the LIR's duty to make sure that the aggregate will always be visible!" (so that the individual networks need not be announced). It's not meant to prohibit announcing more-specifics, though (which RIPE can't do anyway). Gert Doering -- NetMaster -- Total number of prefixes smaller than registry allocations: 81421 SpaceNet AG Mail: netmaster at Space.Net Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Tel : +49-89-32356-0 D- 80807 Muenchen Fax : +49-89-32356-234
- Previous message (by thread): [ipv6-wg] Re: [address-policy-wg] IPv6 prefixes / PI
- Next message (by thread): [ipv6-wg] Re: [address-policy-wg] Re: 200 customer requirements for IPv6
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
[ ipv6-wg Archives ]