Re: [address-policy-wg] FORMAL PROPOSAL: change of initial PA allocation size

[Jeff Williams <]

Hans and all,

  You are mistaken Hans.  It would benefit you and everyone here
if you would track Apnic a little closer...

Hans Petter Holen wrote:

> Dear WG,
> As I have seen no proposals to prolong this process, we have consensus on
> this matter.
>
> Seasons Greetings,
> Hans Petter Holen
> Address Policy WG Chair
>
> |Dear WG,
> |I would like to call for closure on this matter. As this has
> |been presented and discussed at the last RIPE meeting and
> |proposed to the list as a formal proposal I would like to
> |declare consensus on this issue.
> |
> |There have been discussion on the mainlinglist with some
> |critical comments that it is my understanding has been
> |clearified. (This proposal does not affect the payment scedule
> |or membership structure and it does not affecting the PI policy).
> |
> |With this I would normaly declare concensus but as no deadline
> |was set for the discussion I propose a 1 week last call for
> |objections to the process on this  matter. If I receive
> |objections I propose to set a I month comment period before
> |calling for closure on this matter.
> |
> |Best Regards,
> |Hans Petter Holen
> |Address Policy WG Chair
> |
> ||-----Original Message-----
> ||From: address-policy-wg-admin@localhost
> ||[
	    
	    
] On Behalf Of Gert Doering
> ||Sent: Friday, October 24, 2003 2:31 PM
> || ||Subject: [address-policy-wg] FORMAL PROPOSAL: change of initial PA
> ||allocation size
> ||
> ||Hi,
> ||
> ||this was discussed on the list before the last RIPE meeting,
> |and we had
> ||it on the address policy working group meeting (presented by me).
> ||
> ||I think we mostly have consensus on this issue, but I want to present
> ||it as a formal proposal, before it's incorporated into the policy.
> ||
> ||
> ||PROPOSAL:
> ||
> ||  * the minimum initial allocation size (for new LIRs) is reduced from
> ||    a /20, as of today, to a /21.
> ||    (If a new LIR can demonstrate need for a bigger initial
> |allocation,
> ||    they can get a larger address block.  This will not be changed).
> ||
> ||  * the requirement to show an immediate need for 25% of the allocated
> ||    address space is removed for the "minimum initial allocation"
> ||
> ||
> ||The motivation for that is that under the current policy,
> ||startup LIRs that do not already hold address space cannot get
> ||an initial PA allocation (which would be a /20 as of today, or
> ||bigger), because in many cases, they cannot demonstrate
> ||immediate need, or prior utilization of sufficient address space.
> ||
> ||To work around this, many startup LIRs use PI address space as
> ||a start, and when they have filled enough of this, apply for
> ||their own PA again.
> ||The problem with this is that in the end, it's very likely
> ||that more than one route will end up in the global BGP table
> ||(where one PA route would be sufficient), and also it
> ||encourages lying to the RIRs (PI space must not be distributed
> ||to third parties, i.e., LIR customers).
> ||
> ||
> ||The drawback of the changes are that it's potentially wasting
> ||address space for "very small LIRs" (that would be happy with
> ||a /23 PI space and will now get a "huge" /21).  The wastage
> ||would only happen for very small LIRs that will never grow to
> ||fill the initial /21.
> ||A rough calculation shows that "1000 new LIR /21 allocations"
> ||would need a /11, which is not an unbearable strain on the
> ||conservation side, judging from the total number of LIRs in
> ||RIPE land today.
> ||
> ||A second drawback of this is that people may need to adapt
> ||their BGP filters to permit /21s from the network block(s)
> ||where these allocations are made from.  So the RIPE NCC needs
> ||to document this accordingly, and ideally, well in advance.
> ||
> ||Gert Doering
> ||        -- NetMaster
> ||--
> ||Total number of prefixes smaller than registry allocations:
> ||57785 (56883)
> ||
> ||SpaceNet AG                 Mail: netmaster@localhost
> ||Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14   Tel : +49-89-32356-0
> ||80807 Muenchen              Fax : +49-89-32356-299
> ||
> |

Regards,

--
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 134k members/stakeholders strong!)
"Be precise in the use of words and expect precision from others" -
    Pierre Abelard

"If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B;
liability depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by
P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
United States v. Carroll Towing  (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]
===============================================================
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail jwkckid1@localhost
Contact Number: 214-244-4827 or 214-244-3801