[address-policy-wg] 2015-05 Discussion Period extended until 13 May 2016 (Last /8 Allocation Criteria Revision)
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2015-05 Discussion Period extended until 13 May 2016 (Last /8 Allocation Criteria Revision)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2015-05 Discussion Period extended until 13 May 2016 (Last /8 Allocation Criteria Revision)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Remco van Mook
remco.vanmook at gmail.com
Thu May 12 00:06:42 CEST 2016
My apologies to all on the list - this will be my last email about this version of 2015-05. > On 11 May 2016, at 23:21 , Radu-Adrian FEURDEAN <ripe-wgs at radu-adrian.feurdean.net> wrote: > > On Wed, May 11, 2016, at 21:53, Remco van Mook wrote: >> OK, have it your way. Let's look at some numbers: >> >> Available in 185/8 right now: ~ 6,950 /22s (1) >> Available outside 185/8 right now: ~ 8,180 /22s (1) > > I'm OK with that. > >> New LIRs since January 2013: ~4,600 (2,3) >> Budgeted membership growth for the rest of 2016: ~ 1,500 (2) >> >> Before 2016 is out, around 4,000 existing LIRs will have qualified under >> the proposed policy to get another allocation. >> Half the 'outside 185' pool will be gone by the end of this year. > > At the same time, 4472 LIRs do not have any IPv4 space. Is it possible > to know how many of them never requested it, 3.5 years after (or more > likely 2 years after all the restrictions have been lifted) ? > Do you really think all eligible LIRs will make the request within 6 > months ? > I don't know about the 4,472, but let's say 1,000 of them will, at some point. What has been claimed by a multitude of proponents of this proposal is that apparently a single /22 is woefully inadequate to run your business on. I don't even disagree. All of those 4,000 have never received more than a single /22. Given the option to get more, following the rationale of the proposers, I would be very surprised if they didn't jump at that opportunity. The same goes for every new LIR - and they would even be able to include the second /22 in their business planning, so that's another 4,000. Quite a few LIRs who signed up during the 'run out fairly' period (2011-2012) also don't have a /20 of IPv4 address space, I don't have a number but let's put that at another 500. Finally, according to the proposed policy LIRs can come back every 18 months - so by mid 2018 the first group of 4,000 comes back again. That puts the total number of requests for additional /22s by mid 2018 at 13,500. That's 150% of the space you wanted to make available. There won't be space for newcomers in there. Remco -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 842 bytes Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail URL: <https://lists.ripe.net/ripe/mail/archives/address-policy-wg/attachments/20160512/867947ad/attachment.sig>
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2015-05 Discussion Period extended until 13 May 2016 (Last /8 Allocation Criteria Revision)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2015-05 Discussion Period extended until 13 May 2016 (Last /8 Allocation Criteria Revision)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]