[address-policy-wg] 2011-03 New Policy Proposal (Post-depletion IPv4 address recycling)
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2011-03 New Policy Proposal (Post-depletion IPv4 address recycling)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2011-03 New Policy Proposal (Post-depletion IPv4 address recycling)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Janos Zsako
zsako at banknet.net
Mon May 23 17:49:28 CEST 2011
Dear Daniel, > On 05/23/2011 03:10 PM, Sander Steffann wrote: >>> Current policy can be read by several ways. We're just playing with >>> words - current policy doesn't force making single /22 allocations from >>> other blocks than 185.0.0.0/8 (last /8) - it just says "if you have to >>> allocate something from 185.0.0.0/8, you can do only do this and >>> this..." in my eyes. Section 5.6 talks just about the last /8 and this >>> is quite clear description. Last /8 is single address block. >> That is not what it says. The text is: "The following policies come into effect as soon as RIPE NCC is required to make allocations from the final /8 it receives from the IANA. From then on the distribution of IPv4 address space will only be done as follows:" >> >> It says, 'the distribution of IPv4 address space' in general. Once the RIPE NCC has to allocate addresses from the last /8, then from that point in time the distribution "will only be done as follows", which is specified in the "1. Allocations for LIRs from the last /8" and "2. Unforeseen circumstances" sections. The text is pretty clear that I think. > > Article name is: "Use of last /8 for PA Allocations" > - that doesn't mean other /8... it's all only about last /8. I am afraid the text of ripe-509 is very clear: "The following policies come into effect as soon as RIPE NCC is required to make allocations from the final /8 it receives from the IANA. From then on the distribution of IPv4 address space will only be done as follows:" This says two things: 1. These policies do not have to be applied as long as the RIPE NCC has other available addresses than the last /8 2. Once these policies have been triggered, there is no way back (see "From then on..."). > And I don't see any argument, why tie RIPE NCC hands by applying this > policy to other /8's. Current procedures can be used without any problem > anytime - even in future on returned address space. If no addresses are > available except last /8, allocations are simply proceeded in accordance > to section 5.6, if there's some other address space available, standard > procedure can be applied. The current policies do not allow this. You may want to submit a new proposal. I personally do not think it would be wise to allocate returned addresses in accordance with policies applicable before the last /8, if we already started to allocate from the last /8 (i.e. I do not think it would be wise to have two sets of policies, both live at the same time, one applicable to the last /8 and an other one to the returned address space). For the record, I support the "Post-depletion IPv4 address recycling" policy. Best regards, Janos
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2011-03 New Policy Proposal (Post-depletion IPv4 address recycling)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2011-03 New Policy Proposal (Post-depletion IPv4 address recycling)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]