Re: PI & 1st allocation policy
- Date: Sat, 12 Jul 2003 20:47:03 +0200
to add my initial thinking:
No big objections to this - I may be a good idea to make the process of
"growing" the initial allocation to a larger allocation a bit more
transparent and well documented. This is not necessarily directly related
but it could be a concern to keep the number of allocations down (for
routing and for other arbitrary limitations of software.
% ----- Proposal ----- %
1. Reduce the minimum allocation size from /20 to /21
This basically brings us back to the way it was in the RIPE region - no
entry barrier for small ISPs (which I think is a good thing) It is however
different from at least the ARIN policy were one needs to demonstrate prior
2. Remove the requirement to show an immediate need for 25% of the
allocated address space (a /23 in this case)
Sounds reasonable, with the different discussions on PI and
micro-allocations over time - it is clear to me that the only
infrastructure elements needing portable IP addresses may be the root name
3. No longer assign PI (Portable) address space to End Users
Multi homing should be handled differently.
4. End Users requiring a portable address block could become an LIR and
receive a /21 allocation.
The question then is: what is the criteria to become an LIR ?
- none (the need for IP addresses ?)
- something else ? (ref 2 above ?) Clearly the only thing the RIPE NCC can
evaluate is prior use or said intent to use some address space.
Altogether I think this proposal makes much sense - give and take the exact
size of the initial allocation and the immediate need criteria.