[arin-ppml] Transition /10

Martin Hannigan hannigan at gmail.com
Tue Oct 20 11:14:48 EDT 2015


s\/transition/v6 deployment/g terminology collision. Re-purposing this for
new entrants and last allocations, not necessarily "fully" aligning with
other regions.  You can currently go to RIPE for a last /22 regardless of
what region you're in and seems to contradict at least the current fail on
"allowing" use of global resources. Anyhow. Just tossing it out there.



On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 4:05 PM, Hadenfeldt, Andrew C <
Andrew.C.Hadenfeldt at windstream.com> wrote:

> I’m missing some context… RFC6598 (100.64.0.0/10)?
>
>
>
> *-Andy *
>
>
>
> *From:* arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net [mailto:arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net] *On
> Behalf Of *Martin Hannigan
> *Sent:* Tuesday, October 20, 2015 9:57 AM
> *To:* arin-ppml at arin.net
> *Subject:* [arin-ppml] Transition /10
>
>
>
>
>
> Any reason why at this point we shouldn't transition the transition /10 to
> a last /N like policy to more align with others? It does seem to be
> reasonable and fair. It seems like it was a mistake to not set aside the /8.
>
> Thoughts?
>
> Best,
>
> -M<
> ------------------------------
> This email message and any attachments are for the sole use of the
> intended recipient(s). Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or
> distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please
> contact the sender by reply email and destroy all copies of the original
> message and any attachments.
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20151020/2f5fc130/attachment.html>


More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list