<<< Chronological >>> Author Index    Subject Index <<< Threads >>>

Re: [apnic-talk] Status field for inet6num objects

  • To: Anne Lord < >
  • From: Robert Kiessling < >
  • Date: 12 Jun 2002 01:30:54 +0000
  • Cc: Joao Luis Silva Damas < >
  • Lines: 36
Anne Lord anne@localhost writes:

> In addition, I seem to remember (as in ripe-127?) the main reason for 
> introducing the "status" field, was to assist in the identification of 
> address space as PA or PI.

There is no PI in IPv6.

This can't be said often enough.

> With the values suggested:
> 
>  RIR-allocated
>  LIR-allocated
>  Assigned
> 
> this does not seem possible anymore.

Right. It is not necessary.

> To clarify, the values that APNIC would prefer to use are:
> 
> ALLOCATED PORTABLE 
> ALLOCATED NON-PORTABLE  
> ASSIGNED PORTABLE 
> ASSIGNED NON-PORTABLE 

This does not take into account that there are no portable addresses,
and that there is an additional level "LIR-allocated" which IPv4 does
not have.

I like the original proposal of not having the status generated
automatically, and giving them a meaning clearly reflected in the
name.

Robert
  • Post To The List:
<<< Chronological >>> Author    Subject <<< Threads >>>