Re: [members-discuss] IPv6 amount for one member

Hi Gert, On 15/10/2019 22:46, Gert Doering wrote:

I am fairly sure there is more to this than "just because receiving party already had a /29" - nothing in the policies would forbid that.

Gert Doering -- NetMaster

As a datapoint, I certainly have been on the receiving end of this. Consider this scenario: LIR X has an existing /29, and LIR Y has a /32.  Closing LIR Y and transferring all resources to LIR X triggered just such a question. I know that >/29 allocations are of course allowed - I think the issue arises when an LIR has their whole "initial largest" /29 allocation and then adds more through acquisition or transfer. Paul.