[address-policy-wg] Guidance Requested: Changing the Status of PI Address Space
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Guidance Requested: Changing the Status of PI Address Space
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Guidance Requested: Changing the Status of PI Address Space
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Tore Anderson
tore at fud.no
Mon Jun 24 14:06:45 CEST 2013
* Wilfried Woeber > I soemwhat lost track about the RIPE Region's Address Transfer Policy > (proposal/s), so please bear with me. > > IMHO we SHOULD try to remove insconsistencies and special cases in > the various policies and their interpretation. > > Thus: if there is (or will be) a (lower) limit in a/the Transfer > Policy, then the same SHOULD apply in moving blocks from PI to PA. > > OTOH, if the community agrees and lifting size restrictions, then > this should be done consistently across the board. The current PA-only transfer policy states: «The block that is to be re-allocated must not be smaller than the minimum allocation block size at the time of re-allocation». In other words blocks smaller than /22 may not be transferred, regardless of PI or PA status. Since the policy is quite explicit on this point, changing it would require the community to adopt a policy proposal that explicitly made such a change. [BTW: The policy also states that the minimum allocation size is /21, but there have been a couple of /22 transfers already. I assume the NCC is considering the /21 statement as superseded by the last /8 policy and considers the minimum allocation size to be /22 instead.] Tore
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Guidance Requested: Changing the Status of PI Address Space
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Guidance Requested: Changing the Status of PI Address Space
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]