[address-policy-wg] 2007-08 New Policy Proposal (Enabling Methods for Reallocation of IPv4 Resources)

Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote:
> On 29 okt 2007, at 15:47, Nigel Titley wrote:
> 
>> Leo has already proved that a (fairly simple) reclamation job takes a 
>> lot of time and resource. This is for a /8 that no one much wanted and 
>> no one much used.
> 
> Was that the 14/8 thing? Only 129 individual addresses out of 16777216 
> where used. Maybe just reclaiming the other 16777087 would have been 
> more efficient.
> 
> But I'm pretty sure it's too late anyway, just like it's too late to 
> make 240/4 usable.
> 

14/8 is useable - even with an extremely small number of legacy 
allocations, the address block is useable. There is no OS stack that 
says "bad address" for 14/8, which is the essential difference between 
14/8 and 240/4.

   Geoff