[address-policy-wg] 2010-02 New Draft Document Published (Allocations from the last /8)
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2010-02 New Draft Document Published (Allocations from the last /8)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2010-01 New Draft Document Published (Temporary Internet Number Assignment Policies)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Tore Anderson
tore.anderson at redpill-linpro.com
Thu Jul 8 08:10:42 CEST 2010
* Philip Smith > Tore Anderson said the following on 7/07/10 23:01 : >> >> This obviously conflicts with the current minimum allocation size (/21). >> Does the proposed policy intend to change the minimum allocation size >> to /22 so that all LIRs are eligible to receive a /22 (no more, no >> less), or to remove the minimum allocation size completely as suggested >> by the analysis - even when contiguous /22s are available in the >> unallocated pool? > > As you observe, minimum allocation of /21 makes no sense for a policy > proposing maximum allocation of /22. Alain and I hadn't intended to > document a minimum allocation size, but I certainly feel that it is very > unlikely we'll see requests for allocations smaller than a /22 (I could > be wrong of course). My preference is to leave it open so that folks > wanting a smaller allocation can get it. Hi Philip, my concern is not with LIRs that for some reason or another want a longer prefix than a /22, but with LIRs that cannot justify an immediate assignment of a /22. Remember that 12 months from now, LIRs will be allocated space to cover the needs for a period to up to three months only (cf. ripe-492, section 5.0). I don't see anything in the current proposal that allows the NCC to disregard this rule. Not all LIRs will go through a /22 in three months. As I understand it, with no minimum allocation size in place, the NCC would have no choice but to deny any requests for /22 coming from these LIRs. And because of the one allocation only rule, they will be unable to come back and request more space after they've gone through the /23 (or longer) they were able to immediately justify. Best regards, -- Tore Anderson Redpill Linpro AS - http://www.redpill-linpro.com/ Tel: +47 21 54 41 27
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2010-02 New Draft Document Published (Allocations from the last /8)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2010-01 New Draft Document Published (Temporary Internet Number Assignment Policies)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]