Dear Ronald, As of November 2019 the RIPE NCC only provides /24 IPv4 allocations to LIRs that have not previously received an IPv4 allocation from us. As Elvis clarified, the examples you listed are the results of resource transfers. The “netname:” attribute of an INETNUM object in the RIPE Database indicates whether an IPv4 allocation was received directly from the RIPE NCC or via a transfer. It includes the date on which that range was provided by the RIPE NCC, also for smaller ranges that are part of a previously bigger range. If the date in the “netname:” and the date on which the object was created differ, you can deduce that the range concerned was not allocated directly by the RIPE NCC. I hope this helps answer your question. Kind regards, Marco Schmidt RIPE NCC On 15/08/2022 10:45, Elvis Daniel Velea wrote:
hi,
On Mon, Aug 15, 2022 at 01:41 Bogdan Rotariu <bogdan@rotariu.ro> wrote:
On Aug 15, 2022, at 11:19, Ronald F. Guilmette <rfg@tristatelogic.com> wrote:
In message <301e0ef8-ed15-67d3-d390-7bea8571c7cb@ripe.net>, Marco Schmidt <mschmidt@ripe.net> wrote:
On 15/08/2022 09:16, Gert Doering wrote:
Hi,
On Mon, Aug 15, 2022 at 12:10:49AM -0700, Ronald F. Guilmette wrote:
What is the maximum size for current new IPv4 allocations in the RIPE region?
/24 "if there is something to distribute at all"
Just to confirm what Gert said.
For more information please feel free to check our website about IPv4 https://www.ripe.net/manage-ips-and-asns/ipv4
as well the underlying RIPE policy which was published in November 2019 https://www.ripe.net/publications/docs/ripe-733#51
Thank you for the confirmation. Unfortunately, I remain rather mystified by how the following IPv4 blocks, and the current RIPE WHOIS records that pertain to them, comport with what you and Gert have just now told me. Perhaps there is something that I am missing (?)
ORG-AS976-RIPE:
31.44.32.0/20 <http://31.44.32.0/20> created: 2022-06-24T06:46:34Z 46.21.16.0/21 <http://46.21.16.0/21> created: 2022-06-24T06:46:34Z 46.21.28.0/22 <http://46.21.28.0/22> created: 2022-06-24T06:46:34Z 77.220.64.0/19 <http://77.220.64.0/19> created: 2022-06-23T09:56:04Z 185.155.176.0/22 <http://185.155.176.0/22> created: 2022-06-23T09:56:04Z 185.155.184.0/22 <http://185.155.184.0/22> created: 2022-06-24T06:46:34Z 193.221.216.0/23 <http://193.221.216.0/23> created: 2022-06-24T06:46:33Z 193.222.104.0/23 <http://193.222.104.0/23> created: 2022-06-24T06:46:33Z
Regards, rfg
P.S. I would still be concerned, although perhaps a bit less concerned, if this organisation had not elected to place a fradulent and non-existant comnpany name into its public WHOIS organisation: record. I would however still remain befuddled by how this organisation managed to be assigned some 72 times as much IPv4 address space as anybody else could get, all apparently less than 2 months ago.
But there must be a reasoable explanation, I suppose.
when the RIPE NCC processes a transfer and needs to split a block, all the smaller blocks that are transferred from the original large block will have the date of the transfer as creation date
/elvis
There is, those are transfers, check them here https://www.ripe.net/manage-ips-and-asns/resource-transfers-and-mergers/tran... --
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, get a password reminder, or change your subscription options, please visit: https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/address-policy-wg
-- This message was sent from a mobile device. Some typos may be possible.