[address-policy-wg] 2012-01 New Policy Proposal (Inter-RIR IPv4 Address Transfers)
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2012-01 New Policy Proposal (Inter-RIR IPv4 Address Transfers)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2012-01 New Policy Proposal (Inter-RIR IPv4 Address Transfers)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Sascha Luck
lists-ripe at c4inet.net
Tue Apr 3 11:56:48 CEST 2012
On Tue, Apr 03, 2012 at 11:42:31AM +0200, Chris wrote: >also, policy clearly states its purpose to ensure >'consistent and fair' allocation 'to meet the needs', >and that allocation is tied to usage/assignments. sure, but a minimum allocation may be larger than the sum of the assignments - that doesn't mean the NCC can reclaim part of that allocation - or can it? Of course if a policy were to pass that would enable this sort of fragmenting of allocations and the resulting de-aggregation via prefix trading, one might as well make a policy that required the return of unused allocation parts. rgds, Sascha Luck
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2012-01 New Policy Proposal (Inter-RIR IPv4 Address Transfers)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2012-01 New Policy Proposal (Inter-RIR IPv4 Address Transfers)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]