<div dir="auto"><div dir="auto"><span style="font-family:sans-serif">20:27 Laurenz Ruprecht <<a href="mailto:mail@prvy.eu">mail@prvy.eu</a>>:</span><br></div><div dir="auto">>>><span style="font-family:arial;font-size:14px">Where did you notice that?</span></div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div>Many partners couldn't transfer their IPv6, because receiving party already had /29.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Also during audit the support asked: "Do you need 3×/29 IPv6, if not are you going to return them to the free pool? Please provide your further plan of deployment"<br><br><div class="gmail_quote" dir="auto"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">вт, 15 окт. 2019 г., 20:27 Laurenz Ruprecht <<a href="mailto:mail@prvy.eu">mail@prvy.eu</a>>:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div style="font-family:Arial;text-align:left;font-size:14px;color:#000000"><br>Hi Alex!</div><div style="font-family:Arial;text-align:left;font-size:14px;color:#000000"><br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;text-align:left;font-size:14px;color:#000000">> Earlier I have noticed that the NCC tries to return back </div><div style="font-family:Arial;text-align:left;font-size:14px;color:#000000">Where did you notice that?<br><br><hr style="border:0;border-bottom:1px solid #dadada"><b>From:</b> Aleksey Bulgakov <<a href="http:///email/new/1/aleksbulgakov%40gmail.com" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">aleksbulgakov@gmail.com</a>><br><b>Sent:</b> Tuesday, 15. Oct 2019 – 19:15 CEST +0200<br><b>To:</b> <a href="http:///email/new/1/members-discuss%40ripe.net" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">members-discuss@ripe.net</a><br><br><b>Subject:</b> [members-discuss] IPv6 amount for one member<br><br></div><div>
<div dir="auto">Hi, all!<div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">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.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">If you remember, some time ago the NCC required to request IPv6 prior IPv4 request. So, what happens now?</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">---</div><div dir="auto">Kind regards,</div><div dir="auto">Alex</div></div>
</div>
</blockquote></div></div></div>