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/members-discuss@ripe.net/
[members-discuss] IPv6 amount for one member
- Previous message (by thread): [members-discuss] [ncc-announce] [GM] Voting on the RIPE NCC 2019 Financial Surplus
- Next message (by thread): [members-discuss] IPv6 amount for one member
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Aleksey Bulgakov
aleksbulgakov at gmail.com
Tue Oct 15 19:15:34 CEST 2019
Hi, all! Earlier I have noticed that the NCC tries to return back IPv6 allocations to free pool if LIR has more than one /29. I understand that /29 is very big, but is there any policy, which denies to keep more than /29 per LIR (including additional accounts)? Or maybe is the IPv6 exhaustion like IPv4? Also the NCC prevents IPv6 transfer to other LIR if the last one already has IPv6. If you remember, some time ago the NCC required to request IPv6 prior IPv4 request. So, what happens now? --- Kind regards, Alex -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <https://www.ripe.net/ripe/mail/archives/members-discuss/attachments/20191015/406e0c3d/attachment.html>
- Previous message (by thread): [members-discuss] [ncc-announce] [GM] Voting on the RIPE NCC 2019 Financial Surplus
- Next message (by thread): [members-discuss] IPv6 amount for one member
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]