[address-policy-wg] Re: ETNO comments on AD ratio for IPv4 addresses allocation

> [ ... ]
>Findings
>1- This proposal fairly takes into account addressing hierarchies used in
>large and extra-large registries and introduces a useful level of
>flexibility for those registries.
>2- The Local Internet Registries using the 80% criteria may continue to do
>so and will not be impacted by the new policy.
>3- Complicated calculation or administrative burden should be easily avoided
>to registries choosing this method using simple chart or software through
>LIR portal.
>4- As analysed by APNIC, the impact on address consumption is limited to a
>maximum around 20% and can be easily controlled and monitored using a rather
>conservative approach (AD ratio of 0.966).

  Up to this point it sounds reasonable and well-balanced to me,

>5- This impact can be partly counterbalanced by reducing the number of small
>and extra-small registries whose existence is only justified by management
>overhead of large registries with current 80% criteria, and has a positive
>impact on address aggregation.

  but that particular reasoning in "5-":

  		"whose existence is only justified by
		 management overhead of large registries..."

  seems to be slightly off the mark?

>6- No additional impact on registrations is seen in RIPE region, as
>infrastructure assignments are already registered in the database.
> [ ... ]

  Wilfried                                     ( https://cert.aco.net/ )
 _________________________________:_____________________________________
  Wilfried Woeber                 : e-mail: Woeber at CC.UniVie.ac.at
  UniVie Computer Center - ACOnet : Tel: +43 1 4277 - 140 33
  Universitaetsstrasse 7          : Fax: +43 1 4277 - 9 140
  A-1010 Vienna, Austria, Europe  : RIPE-DB: WW144, PGP keyID 0xF0ACB369
 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~:~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~