[address-policy-wg] 2011-03 New Policy Proposal (Post-depletion IPv4 address recycling)
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2011-03 New Policy Proposal (Post-depletion IPv4 address recycling)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2011-03 New Policy Proposal (Post-depletion IPv4 address recycling)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Roger Jørgensen
rogerj at gmail.com
Tue May 24 08:13:54 CEST 2011
On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 2:47 PM, Daniel Suchy <danny at danysek.cz> wrote: <snip> > > Reserve in last /8 is quite enough to cover future requirements for very > long term and there's no need to block address usage in other /8 managed > by RIPE NCC. Your proposal simply creates additional blocked and > efectivelly unused address space in other /8 just due to the policy. > RIPE NCC is here for address distribution to end users. I'm just using > arguments of Remco now - addresses should be used, not reserved for > something surreal. I think you might missed the same fine point I did... RIPE NCC can still return addresses to IANA and those addresses will not fall in under the /8 rule? -- Roger Jorgensen | rogerj at gmail.com | - IPv6 is The Key! http://www.jorgensen.no | roger at jorgensen.no
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2011-03 New Policy Proposal (Post-depletion IPv4 address recycling)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2011-03 New Policy Proposal (Post-depletion IPv4 address recycling)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]