On Wed, May 14, 2025 at 12:27:13PM +0200, Gert Doering wrote:

Hi,

> That said, if I understand the DB limitations correctly, every level
> of SUB-ALLOCATED PA is automatically 1 bit longer - so there is an
> upper limit anyway.

It is not. I actually tested it using a random /24 in the TEST database.
First, I created a /24 inetnum object with the ALLOCATED PA status, and
then 255 inetnum objects with the SUB-ALLOCATED PA status - ranging from
192.0.2.0 - 192.0.2.254 down to 192.0.2.0 - 192.0.2.0. As a side note,
the last one doesn't make much sense, since it's not possible to create
any smaller inetnum object with ASSIGNED PA status.

$ whois -h whois-test.ripe.net -rL 192.0.2.0 | grep status: | wc -l
257
$ whois -h whois-test.ripe.net -rL 192.0.2.0 | grep status: | head -n 3
status:         ALLOCATED UNSPECIFIED
status:         ALLOCATED PA
status:         SUB-ALLOCATED PA

On a more pragmatic note - why don't we ask those who use more than one
or two levels of sub-allocations about their business case? This way, we
might better understand the actual problem.

Best,
Piotr

-- 
Piotr Strzyżewski
-----
To unsubscribe from this mailing list or change your subscription options, 
please visit: https://mailman.ripe.net/mailman3/lists/db-wg.ripe.net/
As we have migrated to Mailman 3, you will need to create an account with the 
email matching your subscription before you can change your settings. 
More details at: https://www.ripe.net/membership/mail/mailman-3-migration/

Reply via email to