[ipv6-wg] IPv6 prefix delegation BCOP document available for comments and suggestions
- Previous message (by thread): [ipv6-wg] IPv6 prefix delegation BCOP document available for comments and suggestions
- Next message (by thread): [ipv6-wg] New on RIPE Labs: IPv6 RIPEness Through the Years
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Yannis Nikolopoulos
dez at otenet.gr
Wed Apr 12 16:24:31 CEST 2017
Carlos, Jordi, thank you both for the heads up (I'm a little behind on the policy mailing list) On 04/12/2017 01:28 AM, Carlos Friacas wrote: > > > Hi Yanis, All, > > > On Tue, 11 Apr 2017, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ wrote: > >> Hi Yanis, >> >> That sounds surprising, but in any case, a few weeks ago, a new >> policy proposal to facilitate this has been approved. I think is >> already implemented or it will a matter of a few days, so you should >> not have any problem at all to justify an allocation for 1.6 millions >> of customers or even much more, with a /48. > > i.e. this message....... (if the estimation was correct, the > announcement will happen very soon!) > > =========================== > Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2017 15:04:06 > From: Marco Schmidt <mschmidt at ripe.net> > To: address-policy-wg at ripe.net > Subject: [address-policy-wg] 2016-05 Proposal Accepted (Synchronising > the Initial and Subsequent IPv6 Allocation Policies) > > Dear colleagues, > > Consensus has been reached on 2016-05, > "Synchronising the Initial and Subsequent IPv6 Allocation Policies". > > This policy change matches the subsequent IPv6 allocation requirements > with the initial allocation requirements. In addition to the existing > justification based on past utilisation, it is now also possible to > document new needs, including the number of users, the extent of the > organisation's > infrastructure, the hierarchical and geographical structuring of > the organisation, the segmentation of infrastructure for security and > the planned longevity of the allocation. > > You can find the full proposal at: > https://www.ripe.net/participate/policies/proposals/2016-05 > > The new RIPE Document is ripe-684 and is available at: > https://www.ripe.net/publications/docs/ripe-684 > > We estimate that this proposal will take around two weeks to fully > implement. > > We will send another announcement once the implementation is complete > and the new procedures are in place. > > Thank you to everyone who provided input. > > Kind regards, > > Marco Schmidt > Policy Development Officer > RIPE NCC > =========================== > > > Cheers, > Carlos > > > >> Regards, >> Jordi >> >> >> -----Mensaje original----- >> De: ipv6-wg <ipv6-wg-bounces at ripe.net> en nombre de Yannis >> Nikolopoulos <dez at otenet.gr> >> Responder a: <dez at otenet.gr> >> Fecha: martes, 11 de abril de 2017, 11:24 >> Para: Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike at swm.pp.se> >> CC: Jan Zorz - Go6 <jan at go6.si>, "ipv6-wg at ripe.net" <ipv6-wg at ripe.net> >> Asunto: Re: [ipv6-wg] IPv6 prefix delegation BCOP document available >> for comments and suggestions >> >> On 04/11/2017 11:57 AM, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote: >> > On Tue, 11 Apr 2017, Yannis Nikolopoulos wrote: >> > >> >> 3.2.2: /48 for all is most practical & most pragmatic? How many >> /32 we >> >> need to burn for our end users? We have ~1.6M residential users >> and >> >> our /29 is definitely not enough. Is RIPE onboard with that? >> > >> > Yes. /48 per site is ok as per all IETF and RIPE documents I am >> aware of. >> > >> > So if your /29 is too small for your customer base, go get >> another one. >> > I know ISPs who returned their /29 before they even started serious >> > deployment, and received larger space. I encourage people to do >> just this. >> > >> >> That's great to hear but when we upgraded our /32 to a /29 >> (~2011), this >> was not the case unfortunately (meaning that RIPE would not accept >> our >> long term addressing plan as a reason enough to get multiple /29s >> >> >> >> >> >> >> ********************************************** >> IPv4 is over >> Are you ready for the new Internet ? >> http://www.consulintel.es >> The IPv6 Company >> >> This electronic message contains information which may be privileged >> or confidential. The information is intended to be for the use of the >> individual(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient be >> aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the >> contents of this information, including attached files, is prohibited. >> >> >> >> >
- Previous message (by thread): [ipv6-wg] IPv6 prefix delegation BCOP document available for comments and suggestions
- Next message (by thread): [ipv6-wg] New on RIPE Labs: IPv6 RIPEness Through the Years
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
[ ipv6-wg Archives ]