Re: [address-policy-wg] Draft: "status:" re-evaluation
- Date: Wed, 13 Aug 2003 15:12:07 +0200
Hi,
On Wed, Aug 13, 2003 at 03:08:57PM +0200, Shane Kerr wrote:
> In the meantime, we do not want to delay the implementation of the
> Sub-Allocation policy. For that reason we'd like to have an interim
> status attribute value for that.
I like that.
> Proposal:
>
> Add "SUB-ALLOCATED PA" to the allowed "status:" values.
That would be in agreement with the original proposal, so "I like that"
(obviously).
> "SUB-ALLOCATED PA" inetnum object may have an "ALLOCATED PA" or an
> "LIR-PARTITIONED PA" less specific inetnum object.
>
> A range of IP's can only have a single "SUB-ALLOCATED PA" in it. That
> is, you cannot sub-allocate twice.
I wouldn't force that on anyone. It might not always make sense, but
we have at least one reseller that has a re-selling customer - so a
two-level structure is already in place.
So "please don't do that".
Gert Doering
-- NetMaster
--
Total number of prefixes smaller than registry allocations: 56535 (56318)
SpaceNet AG Mail: netmaster@localhost
Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Tel : +49-89-32356-0
80807 Muenchen Fax : +49-89-32356-299
|