[address-policy-wg] 2013-03 New Policy Proposal (No Need - Post-Depletion Reality Adjustment and Cleanup)
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2013-03 New Policy Proposal (No Need - Post-Depletion Reality Adjustment and Cleanup)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2013-03 New Policy Proposal (No Need - Post-Depletion Reality Adjustment and Cleanup)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
McTim
dogwallah at gmail.com
Sun Mar 24 17:32:32 CET 2013
Hi Gert, On Sun, Mar 24, 2013 at 12:27 PM, Gert Doering <gert at space.net> wrote: > Hi, > > On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 11:08:34AM +0000, John Curran wrote: >> I am not advocating for a policy outcome one way or the other, but should >> also note that there is a significant amount of early address assignments >> in the ARIN region (e.g. those that were classsful and done in 80's and >> early 90's) > > Do these fall under ARIN policy? > > (ERX space handed out before the existance of the RIRs and then transferred > to the RIPE NCC as part of documentation cleanup does *not* fall under > RIPE address policy) If this is the case, then why does https://www.ripe.net/ripe/policies/proposals/2012-02 say: "Any LIR is allowed to re-allocate complete or partial blocks of IPv4 address space that were previously allocated to them by either the RIPE NCC or the IANA." ? -- Cheers, McTim "A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A route indicates how we get there." Jon Postel
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2013-03 New Policy Proposal (No Need - Post-Depletion Reality Adjustment and Cleanup)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2013-03 New Policy Proposal (No Need - Post-Depletion Reality Adjustment and Cleanup)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]