Re: [address-policy-wg] Policy proposal: #beta: IPv4-HD-Ratio

[Guido Roeskens <]

Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote:
> On 11-apr-2005, at 10:41, Guido Roeskens wrote:
>
> > we from Bluewin fully support the proposal
> > Policy proposal: #beta: IPv4-HD-Ratio
> > LIR: ch.bluewindow
> > Vote: YES
> > Comment:
> > ISP's providing access services to many customers face several  problems
> > - Usage in different PoP's changes;
> >   at one time you have many customers in one PoP, at another
> >   time in others. You need to supply enough adresses to all PoPs even
> >   though they aren't needed all the time.
> > - Assymetric usage of pools and redundancy
> >   To provide redundancy you overallocate some IP addresses to
> >   be able to handle the failure of single devices
> >   The pool usage on the devices and device groups are not balanced
> > - RFC 3194 is as true for IPv4 as for IPv6
> > - consistency between IPv4 and IPv6 policies
>
> What are you proposing? RFC 3194 is a descriptive RFC, it doesn't  
> proscribe anything. What kind of HD ratio would you want to apply to  
> IPv4 allocations?
Look for the mail by alain.bidron@localhost with the subject
"HD ratio policy proposal"

In the mail is a formal proposal entitled
"IPv4-HD-Ratio"

which has the key sentence
"The proposed value of the HD ratio for IPv4 is 0.96"


> Note that the current HD ratio for all IPv4 address space that isn't  
> reserved by IANA is 90.45%.
As you see the HD Ratio propsed is much higher but
would help LIR's with bigger allocations to justify
their IP usage.

Guido Roeskens
Swisscom Fixnet AG
Bluewin