[address-policy-wg] Reducing IXP IPv4 assignment default size to a /26
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Reducing IXP IPv4 assignment default size to a /26
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Consensus - 2023-01 - Reducing IXP IPv4 assignment default size to a /26
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Servperso
ml at servperso.com
Tue Sep 5 16:02:12 CEST 2023
Hello, Yes, there is some. As an example, what append if you move your activity from sole proprietorship to company and sponsor an ixp ? Another example, small ixp backed by multiple isp. After sometime, one want to stop and move ressource to other one. Blocking PI for IXP transfert is a nonsense for me. Just ripe need to be sure they are still and only used for ixp usage. Also, pruposing a /26 maybe kill some abuse by design. I saw some IXP pi on fullview and they are not a "configuration mistake" from one member. Sarah Le 05-09-23 à 15:43, Viacheslav Adamanov a écrit : > Dear community, > > The problem with ipv4 network speculation for IXP is exaggerated. RIPE > NCC forbids transferring this networks to another company. > > Have there been cases of transmission of such networks? > > Kind regards, > Viacheslav Adamanov. > > IXP Mesh > Ukraine, Mariupol >
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Reducing IXP IPv4 assignment default size to a /26
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Consensus - 2023-01 - Reducing IXP IPv4 assignment default size to a /26
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]