Re: Address space for individuals
- Date: Fri, 20 May 1994 10:31:28 +0200 (MET DST)
Daniel Karrenberg wrote :
>
>
> We will write something up next week. If someone else does before
> us we can use that!
>
> My proposal would read like:
>
> - very small enterprises (VSEs) are those <32 hosts now
>
> - last resort registries will not assign address space to VSEs
>
> - VSEs can use private address space (RFC1697)
> - VSEs are easy to renumber once they connect
> - VSEs are likely to connect with one host only
>
> - service provider registries will assign VSEs smaller amounts
> of address space than 8 bits where possible
>
> - service provider registries will register these smaller amounts
> in the RIPE database when possible
>
> Rationale:
>
> Very many VSEs with 8 bits of address space each will use up
> too much address space.
>
>
>
> Is this acceptable to all?
YES
>
> Implementation: If this was accepted the NCC could accept classles
> inetnums very soon even before the indexing is fully classless.
>
> Question: Should we publish such things as RIPE documents or just
> circulate them among registries as "current practise recommendations".
> I personally think we should publish them, but have heared reservations.
I am in favour of publication because it is then clear that it is a general
policy, and not just a register who want to give a hard time to a VSE...
>
> Daniel
>
Stephan
>
--
Stephan Biesbroeck Tel: +32(0)2-2383470
stephan@localhost Fax: +32(0)2-2315131
Service Support Team of the Belgian National Research Network, BELNET
