[address-policy-wg] Policy for allocation of IPv6 address space from IANA to RIRs

On Wed, Aug 11, 2004 at 03:37:57PM +0200, Gert Doering wrote:

> > I see absolutely no need in assigning gigantic netblocks (like /8s) to the
> > RIRs. The few RIRs now do not at all mean, that there will be only few in 20
> > years. Then we might have NIRs (N=National). In that case we already need
> > around 150 /8s? Or we might have PIRs (P=planetary)? Or we have something
> > that does not end in IR at all?
> 
> Nothing in the proposed policy document prevents this.

Sorry, I misunderstood you then. I thought you were proposing to assign a /8
to the RIR directly from start on. I actually like the idea of making the
assignments for the current RIRs far apart from each other allowing their
block to grow or to assign the space in between to other organizations
should it move in this direction.

And making assignments that will most likely last for the next 3 years seems
to be a reasonable value. Planning further ahead is not making sense anyway,
as then we are in the area of wild guessing.

So if the ripe can show a need for a /12 in the next 3 years give them one.
If they can not, make it a /16 or a /20 or whatever the ripe will need. Same
goes for the other RIRs.


Nils
-- 
Hast du das auch etwas deutlicher, oder bist du das Orakel von Jena?
      [Joerg Moeller zu Lutz Donnerhacke in de.admin.net-abuse.news]