[address-policy-wg] Policy proposal: #alpha: TLD Anycast Allocation Policy

On Thursday 24 March 2005 19:08, Gert Doering wrote:
>
> Microallocations are PI in disguise - end users get address space directly
> from a RIR.  If that's not PI, then what else is?
>

Yes, I agree that they are PI in disguise. But they are still a way of saying 
to general end users that there's no such thing as PI space - by general end 
users, I mean corporations not people like TLD (or ccTLD) operators (they 
should know full well what's what). Or are we just going to say, if you can 
create a good enough case then PI exists - come and get it.

I think that giving every TLD (or every 'special' case if you like) a /32 is a 
complete waste of address space, and as Randy said have we learnt nothing 
from the past. It's not so much about conservation as about being sensible. 
We don't know and no one has been very successful (afaict) in predicting the 
growth of the 'net, so perhaps being sensible is a good idea :). If we (as in 
RIPE) are going to start handing out longer than /32's then all the RIR's 
have to make it abundantly clear that they don't support the idea of /32 
filters - or should they (RIR's) make allocations/assignments (call them what 
you will) from a global pool for these micro allocations and everyone then 
shouts about how this specific /32 shouldn't be filtered.

How soon do we think the routing tables are going to become unmanageable (and 
I mean unmanageable by the routers themselves) ?? 3 years, 5 years ??
Perhaps we ought to be asking the people who design/build the routers what 
they think their kit will be capable of by then. We have seen large increases 
(in % terms) of what routers can now do compared to 5 years ago, what's to 
say we're not going to see even bigger % increases over the next 5 years.

Jon