[address-policy-wg] 2006-05 New Draft Document Published (PI Assignment Size)
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2006-05 New Draft Document Published (PI Assignment Size)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2006-05 New Draft Document Published (PI Assignment Size)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
David Croft
david at sargasso.net
Fri Oct 22 02:24:55 CEST 2010
On 21 October 2010 14:23, James Blessing <james.blessing at despres.co.uk> wrote: > I have 256 machines and 1 router, that's 257 addresses required. Under > the new wording I can't then have a /23 because I have a requirement > for 253 more addresses to make it up... Under that circumstance you'd get a /23 under existing policy. The intent seems to be that if you'd normally be assigned a /29-/25, it's rounded up to a /24. The limit of 248 addresses presumably being to stop abuse, by enabling the NCC to assess this 'slack' across multiple allocations. David
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2006-05 New Draft Document Published (PI Assignment Size)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2006-05 New Draft Document Published (PI Assignment Size)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]