Minimum allocation size

Sascha Luck wrote:
> Thus spoke Nurani Nimpuno:
> > Due to these low usage rates, the RIPE NCC is considering changing
> > the initial allocation size from the current /19 to a /20, in order
> > to
> > accommodate this change in the usage patterns.
>
> How is a new LIR going to announce their routes then?

Does anyone have any estimates on how much more routes this change
would cause?  I would suspect that this would take several years
before even a 10% increase would be seen.  Since this does not mean
that you have to break the current aggregations.

We have found this /19 to be rather large.  We are a merger of about
20 small ISPs and also several LIRs.  Now we are in the process of
either filling up several /19 (since returning them to RIPE was a
bigger job) and renumbering ISPs that never became LIRs.

Starting with a /20 and somehow getting all of the ISPs to become LIRs
would be great.  Low cost entry LIRs at /20 and some simple web-based
method for allocating the space (get them hooked!).  Once they fill
their /20 they'd have to become real LIRs.  Unfortunately I can't
guarantee that this actually saves address space in the long run.

Since these mergers that we have seen here in Finland are bound to
happen everywhere else once the market penetration is high enough.

-- 
     Niilo Neuvo                   >>>^<<<       niilo.neuvo at saunalahti.fi
     CTO                             /$\      +358 (0) 50 5611042 (mobile)
     SAUNALAHTI Oyj                  | |         +358 (0) 50 85611042 (fax)
     .88.744/7.88.744/7.88.744/7.88.oOOOo.88.744/7.88.744/7.88.744/7.88.74