nanog mailing list archives
Re: Last of ipv4 /8's allocated
From: Iljitsch van Beijnum <iljitsch () muada com>
Date: Wed, 2 Feb 2011 09:20:56 +0100
On 2 feb 2011, at 0:39, Randy Carpenter wrote:
That's how I would do it. With the exception of LACNIC, each one neighbors a block that is already allocated to that RIR.
But if they wanted to do that, why give 106/8 to APNIC?
I assume you mean 102/8
No, I was talking about monday's allocations: http://www.apnic.net/publications/news/2011/delegation
Current thread:
- Re: Last of ipv4 /8's allocated, (continued)
- Re: Last of ipv4 /8's allocated Leen Besselink (Feb 01)
- Re: Last of ipv4 /8's allocated Randy Carpenter (Feb 01)
- Re: Last of ipv4 /8's allocated Jeroen van Aart (Feb 01)
- Re: Last of ipv4 /8's allocated Benson Schliesser (Feb 01)
- Re: Last of ipv4 /8's allocated Jeroen van Aart (Feb 01)
- Re: Last of ipv4 /8's allocated Owen DeLong (Feb 01)
- Re: Last of ipv4 /8's allocated Curtis Maurand (Feb 08)
- Re: Last of ipv4 /8's allocated Owen DeLong (Feb 08)
- Re: Last of ipv4 /8's allocated Curtis Maurand (Feb 08)
- Re: Last of ipv4 /8's allocated Owen DeLong (Feb 01)
- Re: Last of ipv4 /8's allocated Iljitsch van Beijnum (Feb 02)
- Re: Last of ipv4 /8's allocated David Conrad (Feb 01)
- Re: Last of ipv4 /8's allocated Randy Carpenter (Feb 03)