[address-policy-wg] 2017-03 New Policy Proposal (Reducing Initial IPv4 Allocation, aiming to preserve a minimum of IPv4 space)
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2017-03 New Policy Proposal (Reducing Initial IPv4 Allocation, aiming to preserve a minimum of IPv4 space)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2017-03 New Policy Proposal (Reducing Initial IPv4 Allocation, aiming to preserve a minimum of IPv4 space)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Arash Naderpour
arash_mpc at parsun.com
Fri Sep 22 02:21:10 CEST 2017
Hi, I don't see a need to do this change in the policy at the moment. consummation rate is the same as before. Even if there is a need, it could be 3x/24 or /23.why change it from /22 to /24? Arash On Fri, Sep 22, 2017 at 12:34 AM, Tim Chown <tjc at ecs.soton.ac.uk> wrote: > > On 21 Sep 2017, at 13:33, Aled Morris <aled.w.morris at googlemail.com> > wrote: > > > > On 21 September 2017 at 12:43, Marco Schmidt <mschmidt at ripe.net> wrote: > > The goal of this proposal is to reduce the IPv4 allocations made by the > RIPE NCC > > to a /24 (currently a /22) and only to LIRs that have not received an > IPv4 allocation > > directly from the RIPE NCC before. > > > > At the current run-rate, do we know what is the expected expiry of the > free pool in RIPE's hands? > > There’s http://www.potaroo.net/tools/ipv4/. > > Tim > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <https://lists.ripe.net/ripe/mail/archives/address-policy-wg/attachments/20170922/89f2e1b0/attachment.html>
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2017-03 New Policy Proposal (Reducing Initial IPv4 Allocation, aiming to preserve a minimum of IPv4 space)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2017-03 New Policy Proposal (Reducing Initial IPv4 Allocation, aiming to preserve a minimum of IPv4 space)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]