[address-policy-wg] Summary of the PI Task Force's recent discussions

Gert,

On Monday, August 11, 2003, at 11:50 AM, Gert Doering wrote:

> Hi,
>
> On Mon, Aug 11, 2003 at 11:48:28AM +0200, Joao Luis Silva Damas wrote:
>> I have one question, trying to understand the main goal of the 
>> exercise:
>>
>> * Is the aim of the a new PI policy to adjust the policy to the
>> requests and needs of the industry or is it a way of getting a 
>> "special
>> allocation" policy by another name?
>
> My aim is to adjust the policy (actually both PA and PI policy) to 
> match
> observed need.
>

That is good.

> People are requesting *multiple* PI blocks because they can't get a PA
> allocation, and that seems to be just wrong to me.
>

Just to spell it out clearly:

- Is it people who do not meet the minimum allocation size for PA? I 
guess these ones would ask for a single PI assignment?

- Is it people who find it to be so much hassle to get an allocation 
that they end up requesting multiple PI blocks with the same amount of 
addresses?

- People who have multiple sites and if they get a normal PA block will 
need to split it and end up with a bunch of non-routable sites?

Other?

Just trying to understand.

One last thing. There is something that makes it unusually attractive 
to have PI space: it usually comes from "old" blocks (192/8, 193-195/8) 
where you don't have to bother with anyone filtering you if you have at 
least a /24 (damn easy to justify).

Joao