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/routing-wg@ripe.net/
[routing-wg] New IPv4 block allocated to RIPE NCC
- Previous message (by thread): [routing-wg] New IPv4 block allocated to RIPE NCC
- Next message (by thread): [routing-wg] New IPv4 block allocated to RIPE NCC
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Andrea Cima
andrea at ripe.net
Mon Feb 7 14:47:28 CET 2011
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Hi Arturo, When talking about the last /8 we refer to the last /8 (185/8) given by the IANA to the RIPE NCC. Please see section A of the impact analysis for policy proposal 2010-02 'Allocations from the last /8': "This proposal describes the distribution of IPv4 address space from the moment that the RIPE NCC would have to begin using the final /8 received from the IANA." http://www.ripe.net/ripe/policies/proposals/2010-02.html best regards, Andrea Cima RIPE NCC > On 2/7/11 2:02 PM, Arturo Servin wrote: >> Question. >> >> When you refer to the last /8: >> >> Do you refer to the last /8 given to RIPE NCC by IANA? or >> >> The last /8 stock of addresses in RIPE (generated may be by >> fragments from several other /8s)? >> >> Thanks, >> .as >> >> On 7 Feb 2011, at 10:43, Nurani Nimpuno wrote: >> >>> http://www.ripe.net/ripe/docs/ripe-509.html#----use-of-last----for-pa-allocations >>> >>> >>> 5.6 Use of last /8 for PA Allocations >>> <snip> >>> • Allocations for LIRs from the last /8 >>> >>> On application for IPv4 resources LIRs will receive IPv4 addresses >>> according to the following: >>> >>> a. LIRs may only receive one allocation from this /8. The size of the >>> allocation made under this policy will be exactly one /22. >>> >>> b. LIRs receive only one /22, even if their needs justify a larger >>> allocation. >>> <snip> >>> >>> So neither minimum or maximum I guess. But exactly a /22. >>> >>> Nurani >>> >>> On 7 feb 2011, at 12.38, Max Tulyev wrote: >>> >>>> Hi All, >>>> >>>> so _minimum_ or _maximum_? >>>> >>>> 07.02.11 11:31, Andrea Cima написав(ла): >>>>> The minimum allocation size for this /8 has been set at /22. >>>> -- >>>> WBR, >>>> Max Tulyev (MT6561-RIPE, 2:463/253 at FIDO) >>>> > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.11 (Darwin) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iEYEARECAAYFAk1P9/AACgkQXOgsmPkFrjO7jQCfUgX0zng7mJ56D0o78LrJuQLZ ZssAoKwZr1j2Q9+E6xnD96AbqjxePVI2 =ZxPk -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
- Previous message (by thread): [routing-wg] New IPv4 block allocated to RIPE NCC
- Next message (by thread): [routing-wg] New IPv4 block allocated to RIPE NCC
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]