[address-policy-wg] The final /8 policy proposals, part 2

On 06/07/2009 2:45, "Sander Steffann" <sander at steffann.nl> wrote:

[...]

>> A whole /8 for might be more than necessary for this though.
> 
> Maybe we can reserve a certain amount of address space for this. A
> whole /8 might indeed be too much. The RIPE NCC seems to grow with
> about 700 new LIRs each year. If we want to have at least enough for
> the first 5 years we need 3500 blocks of address space. Let's round
> that up to 4096. If we use a fixed allocation size of /22 we will need
> to reserve a /10. That leaves 3/4 of the final /8 for the existing LIRs.

I think it is also important to take account of non-member registrations. As
I understand it, the RIPE NCC has been making more PI assignments than
allocations for a good four or five years. If address space is only
available to LIRs (members) then anyone who previously would have settled
for a little bit of PI would need to become a member. The reserved space
would be used up faster than a projection based on new member allocations
alone would suggest.

It would be helpful if RIPE NCC staff could provide statistics showing the
number and size distribution of PI assignments over the last five years. It
would also be good to know how much of the address space currently set aside
for PI assignments remains available.

Regards,

Leo Vegoda