[address-policy-wg] Another small IPv6 allocation policy change proposal (sanity check email)...
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Another small IPv6 allocation policy change proposal (sanity check email)...
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Another small IPv6 allocation policy change proposal (sanity check email)...
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Nick Hilliard
nick at inex.ie
Wed Nov 7 13:22:42 CET 2012
On 07/11/2012 11:53, Jan Zorz @ go6.si wrote: > Is this something that nobody cares and should not be fixed? Is this a > threat to someone? Anyone sees any danger in going forward with this small > change? To give some background data on this, I figure this affects 55 LIRs out of 4587 which have ipv6 allocations. Of these, 44 LIRs have exactly 2 x 32. The distribution for the rest is: > /32 /32 /30 /27 > /32 /32 /32 > /32 /32 /32 > /32 /32 /32 > /32 /32 /32 /32 > /32 /32 /32 /32 > /32 /32 /32 /32 > /32 /32 /32 /32 > /32 /32 /32 /32 /32 > /32 /32 /32 /32 /32 > /32 /32 /32 /32 /32 /32 /32 /32 /32 /30 Nick
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Another small IPv6 allocation policy change proposal (sanity check email)...
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Another small IPv6 allocation policy change proposal (sanity check email)...
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]