Search RPD Archives
[AfriNIC-rpd] Re: Proposal: Reclamation of allocated but unrouted IPv4 addresses.
Jackson Muthili
jacksonmuthi at gmail.com
Wed Feb 9 17:41:30 UTC 2011
Andrew,
On Wed, Feb 9, 2011 at 7:21 PM, Andrew Alston <aa at tenet.ac.za> wrote:
>
> I have concerns about this policy, since as has been stated in various other
> discussion forums, there are several reasons to have so called "live"
> (non-rfc1918) space that is not announced in the routing tables but is
> actively in use.
Correct. IXPs are one exception. I am willing to accommodate other
similar cases in the proposal.
> Also, at which point are you evaluating the routing tables? I can point to
> several instances where space is "partially" announced (within a geographic
> area, yet not propagated globally). The space is completely valid and being
> utilized, but factors preclude its global announcement.
That is why time from issue to announcement has been defined.
> This proposal also makes no provision for the handling of so called legacy
> address segments, which would have to be dealt with as a separate issue.
It handles legacy IPv4.
2.1 - 2.4 clauses cover for these scenario.
Those are in fact the key targets for the proposal.
Cheers
Jack
More information about the RPD
mailing list