Hi Remco, On Tue, May 24, 2011 at 4:20 AM, Remco Van Mook <Remco.vanMook@eu.equinix.com> wrote:
Hi Martin,
I'll try to answer the points you raised below:
1. This proposal does not impact transfer at all. Addresses that get transferred are at no point in that process 'returned to the RIPE NCC'.
2. It's not explicitly defined because it all depends on the address space returned. As I already indicated in another email, the long term effect of this is likely to be that all /8s managed by the RIPE NCC will have a minimum allocation size of a /22; and if we then run out of /22s or larger and need to hand out multiple smaller blocks (moving to clause 4) a few additional /8s might get *really* unlucky. But that will only happen when we're scraping the RIPE NCC barrel.
Best regards,
Remco
Thank you for the clarification. I'm satisfied with the above, which is what I expected. Thanks! Best regards, Martin