[db-wg] geofeed issue: can't add geofeed attribute to PI /48
- Previous message (by thread): [db-wg] geofeed issue: can't add geofeed attribute to PI /48
- Next message (by thread): [db-wg] geofeed issue: can't add geofeed attribute to PI /48
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Job Snijders
job at fastly.com
Thu Feb 24 16:54:10 CET 2022
On Thu, Feb 24, 2022 at 04:48:57PM +0100, Edward Shryane wrote: > Hi Job, > > > On 24 Feb 2022, at 16:31, Job Snijders <job at fastly.com> wrote: > > > > Dear Ed, > > > > Thank you for the message. Apologies for nitpicking a bit more :-) > > Not at all, thank you for reviewing the details. > > > In the 'inet6num' listing you reference ">= /48", did you mean to write > > "> /48"? (which would conceptually align with the cut-off in ipv4: "> /24") > > This is intentional and as currently implemented, we do not allow > geofeed on any assignments that are reasonably assumed to be related > to one individual user. > > From the Legal analysis in November: > > """In order to be on the safe side, we suggest to allow the geofeed attribute to registrations as follows: > - For inetnum objects, equal or larger than the minimum allocation by the RIPE NCC, i.e. equal or larger than /24 > - For inet6num objects larger than the minimum recommended assignment to end customer CPE devices, i.e. larger than /48 (please see here - > https://www.ripe.net/publications/docs/ripe-690#4-2--prefix-assignment-options > - “Best Current Operational Practice for Operators: IPv6 prefix assignment for end-users - persistent vs non-persistent, and what size to choose”) > """ > > i.e. for inetnum do *not* allow geofeed on assignments smaller than > /24 (given the minimum allocation size), and for inet6num do *not* > allow on (more specific, not top-level) assignments equal to or > smaller than /48. Ah, right. I guess my question was what classes of space *under the newly proposed validation rules* (still) would not be eligible. :-) Apologies for presenting my question in a perhaps somewhat confusing way. My goal is to get an overview of the 'inverse' of what followed from this message: https://www.ripe.net/ripe/mail/archives/db-wg/2022-February/007271.html You wrote "Accordingly, we will allow geofeed: <snip>"; which prompted me to ask what classes would not be allowed. Kind regards, Job
- Previous message (by thread): [db-wg] geofeed issue: can't add geofeed attribute to PI /48
- Next message (by thread): [db-wg] geofeed issue: can't add geofeed attribute to PI /48
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
[ db-wg Archives ]