This archive is retained to ensure existing URLs remain functional. It will not contain any emails sent to this mailing list after July 1, 2024. For all messages, including those sent before and after this date, please visit the new location of the archive at https://mailman.ripe.net/archives/list/[email protected]/
[address-policy-wg] The final /8 policy proposals, part 2
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] The final /8 policy proposals, part 2
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] The final /8 policy proposals, part 2
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Gert Doering
gert at space.net
Sun Jul 5 18:41:17 CEST 2009
Hi,
On Sun, Jul 05, 2009 at 12:19:48PM +0200, Andreas Schachtner wrote:
> > b) All requests are downscaled by a certain factor, as described in
> > 2009-04
>
> This sounds sensible to me. A downsscaling factor of 64 will give enough
> address space to stay in the allocation business for some (small "some) years.
How exactly would "downscaling" work? A company demonstrates need for (say)
a /19, and they get 8192/64 = a /25 - while a newcomer demonstrates the
need for a /24, and gets a /30...
So if we go that way, quite some thought needs to go into implementation
details.
Gert Doering
-- NetMaster
--
Total number of prefixes smaller than registry allocations: 128645
SpaceNet AG Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard
Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann
D-80807 Muenchen HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen)
Tel: +49 (89) 32356-444 USt-IdNr.: DE813185279
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] The final /8 policy proposals, part 2
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] The final /8 policy proposals, part 2
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]