[address-policy-wg] RE: [ipv6-wg] additional IPv6 allocation (ripe-512 issues)

Let me try to understand:

(A) We don't disagree that he might actually deserve more than /32
(B) According to my understanding of previous discussions I had on this topic, RIPE might actually have already reserved extra space for his future needs
(C) According to the current rules he can't get another /32 for a total of /31 without using most of the current /32 (and hoping his next /32 will be adjacent)
(D) Someone is seriously suggesting he returns the current /32 and asks for a brand new /31 which he will likely get.

Was someone reading too much Kafka or The Good Soldier Švejk lately?

Ivan

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jan Zorz @ Go6.si [mailto:jan at go6.si]
> Sent: Monday, July 18, 2011 5:13 PM
> To: Ivan Pepelnjak; 'Sander Steffann'; 'Yannis Nikolopoulos'
> Subject: RE: [ipv6-wg] additional IPv6 allocation (ripe-512 issues)
> 
> Going to production it was said :)
> 
> I did a long discussion with Alex Le Heux (RIPE IPRA) about the same
> issue, his advice was that.
> 
> Jan
> 
> Ivan Pepelnjak <ipepelnjak at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> >Extremely helpful advice from the ops perspective.
> >
> >> Trade in your /32 and get something bigger under initial alloc
> >> conditions... :)
> 
> --
> Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.