RE: [address-policy-wg] new policy idea for PA allocations

[<matthew.ford@localhost]

Remco,

If it's a choice between [2 /17s, 1 /18, 5 /19s and 2 /20s] and [1 /17
and a note that says 'come back when you need more'], I'll take the
former every time.

I don't agree that a 'requester is not going to be happy to to get a
bunch of /24s from all over the swamp space to fill their request' -
they are going to be happy if that's all there is available.

Preventing a single request from wiping out the remaining RIR reserves
can more easily be prevented by some policy along the lines of 'no more
than x% of remaining reserves', coupled with some lower bound.


Regards,
Mat

> -----Original Message-----
> From: address-policy-wg-admin@localhost 
> [
	    
	    
] On Behalf Of Remco van Mook
> Sent: 06 August 2008 22:45
> Subject: [address-policy-wg] new policy idea for PA allocations
> 
> [ This email is *not* about 2007-08 but something else that 
> crossed my mind, expect a revised 2007-08 soon ]
> 
>  
> 
> Dear all,
> 
>  
> 
> I want to hear your feedback on an idea that I've been 
> playing with for a while - it has to do with the way the RIR 
> allocates blocks of space to an approved IPv4 PA allocation request.
> 
>  
> 
> Currently that's very simple. Once the request is approved 
> for, say, a /15, you get a single routable block of space, a 
> /15. But what do we do when the RIR does not have that size 
> block anymore? Allocate multiple blocks to that request (so, 
> for example, 2 /17s, 1 /18, 5 /19s and 2 /20s)? 
> 
>  
> 
> What I would suggest is that we set into policy that the RIR, 
> in cases like this, allocates a single best-fit routable 
> block of IPv4 space. So, if the request is for a /12 and the 
> biggest block the RIR has left is a /14, you get a /14. The 
> rationale behind this is quite simple: the requester is not 
> going to be happy to get a bunch of /24s from all over the 
> swamp space to fill his request, and at the same time we 
> remove the risk that a single request is able to wipe out the 
> entire RIR reserves. Smaller requests can still be fulfilled 
> and the LIRs that need more space simply need to come back 
> more often - the 80% usage rule still applies.
> 
>  
> 
> As long as the RIR has a supply from IANA, this rule will 
> have no operational impact as far as I can see.
> 
>  
> 
> I'm hesitant whether we should apply this to PI requests as 
> well - I'd say yes but that does have an impact on the way 
> we're currently handling that...
> 
>  
> 
> Let me know what you think.
> 
>  
> 
> Best,
> 
>  
> 
> Remco