RE: [lir-wg] Discussion about RIPE-261
- Date: Mon, 26 May 2003 11:18:09 -0700
My comments about RIPE-261:
- I like the fact that the three big RIRs are working together up front.
It is full of good intentions.
- The "sparse allocation algorithm" or "binary chop algorithm" is trying
to re-invent the wheel. Please refer to RFC3531 instead. It is a good
idea though.
- I don't like the idea of the CAP.
> Gert Doering wrote:
> Nevertheless, let's get back to the basic question - how
> shall we go ahead:
My order of preference is (with notes)
| [1] go for a full multi-level regional distribution, down to
| "one /32 per LIR per country" (as detailed by Michael Py)
This still requires some work to be done but has finer aggregation
capabilities than the one below. In essence, it is an enhancement of the
one below.
| [2] allocate bigger chunks IANA->RIR (/8?) and inside those
| chunks, use a binary chop algorithm similar to the one
| described in RIPE-261
This looks a good option to me. If going this way I would advise
including AFRINIC up front in the process even though they have not
started yet.
| [3] continue the IANA->RIR->LIR allocation as it is now
It's not good but it's not bad.
| [4] accept RIPE-261
The main reason I put list as my last choice is because I think the size
of the CAP (/3) is too big. If we want any special-purpose application
we'll have to get out of FP001 which is going to be politically very
difficult. If the CAP was a /5 I would have put this option as #3.
Michel.
