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