[address-policy-wg] 2009-05 New Policy Proposal (Multiple IPv6 /32 Allocations for LIRs)
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2009-05 New Policy Proposal (Multiple IPv6 /32 Allocations for LIRs)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2009-05 New Policy Proposal (Multiple IPv6 /32 Allocations for LIRs)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Stream Service
info at streamservice.nl
Wed Apr 15 19:11:43 CEST 2009
-----Original Message----- From: address-policy-wg-admin at ripe.net [mailto:address-policy-wg-admin at ripe.net] On Behalf Of Jerzy Pawlus Sent: woensdag 15 april 2009 16:48 To: lists-ripe at c4inet.net Cc: gert at space.net; address-policy-wg at ripe.net Subject: Re: [address-policy-wg] 2009-05 New Policy Proposal (Multiple IPv6 /32 Allocations for LIRs) On Wed, Apr 15, 2009 at 03:51:41PM +0200, Gert Doering wrote: > > - the current policy doesn't permit a single LIR to receive multiple > > allocations (warning: an allocation can be bigger than a /32, so this > > needs to be taken into account in the wording) > > I think this would be most easily solved by removing the condition that > each /32 must be announced as such. In my opinion an "address allocation/ > assignment" policy is not supposed to make routing decisions anyway. > This is acceptable solution, however it leaves more space to "uncontrolable deaggregation". The net result will be more inconsistent filters. Jurek --------------------- Just make it policy that it shouldn't be smaller as a /48. This will reduce it a little bit, also requesting to aggregate where possible should be fine I guess. Mark
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2009-05 New Policy Proposal (Multiple IPv6 /32 Allocations for LIRs)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2009-05 New Policy Proposal (Multiple IPv6 /32 Allocations for LIRs)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]