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

Hi,

On Mon, Aug 11, 2003 at 12:24:14PM +0200, Joao Damas wrote:
> > 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?

The ones I've heard about is "people that are startup ISPs, and still
too small for PA".  So they get a PI (because that's all they can get),
and when that's full, they get another PI, and so on, until they can
demonstrate "utilization of a /21" - and then they go for PA.

They are effectively using PI as a "easier to get PA substitute" - which
is wrong, but points at a serious problem in the policy.

> - 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?

After a while, they move from your first category to this one...

> - 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?

As far as I know, not this.

[..]
> 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).

But this only works if you actually *get* a /24.  So people that run two
servers have to lie to the NCC to get a /24 (instead of a /29 or a /28),
which is also a hint at a broken policy.

Gert Doering
        -- NetMaster
-- 
Total number of prefixes smaller than registry allocations:  56535  (56318)

SpaceNet AG                 Mail: netmaster at Space.Net
Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14   Tel : +49-89-32356-0
80807 Muenchen              Fax : +49-89-32356-299