[address-policy-wg] Reopening discussion on RIPE Policy Proposal 2006-05

I believe the proposal has great merit and needs further discussion, and
is directly related to my email on the 12th July.


"The other issue with suggesting that we use PI Space instead of PA
Space where we will not be in a position to aggregate is the PI
Assignment which would be approved would be less than a /24 (as we don't
need 128 addresses for Multi-homed BGP Peering), therefore wouldn't be
routable on the Internet (Policy proposal 2006-05 refers to this issue
and suggests the smallest PI Space should be /24) So the only way to
implement Multi-Homed BGP Routing from Multiple locations which don't
need a full /24 network is to become a LIR and create smaller /25 or /26
inetnum's with larger /24 route objects from your PA Space. And since
this is a workaround, just like a company stretching the truth about
their IP requirements when applying for a PI Space to get a full /24,
surely a LIR should be allowed to create inetnum's for a /24 when they
also need to create a /24 route object."

And while all transits may not route a /24 IP Range, the Tier1 transits
we are paying for transit do route /24 networks, but are filtering
anything smaller.


Keith
-----Original Message-----
From: address-policy-wg-admin at ripe.net
[mailto:address-policy-wg-admin at ripe.net] On Behalf Of Gert Doering
Sent: 17 July 2009 09:42
To: Greg
Cc: address-policy-wg at ripe.net
Subject: Re: [address-policy-wg] Reopening discussion on RIPE Policy
Proposal 2006-05

Hi,

On Fri, Jul 17, 2009 at 09:41:00AM +0300, Greg wrote:
> It's not a bad proposal - there was a great discussion before. 

Having "great discussions" doesn't necessarily make it a *good* proposal
either.  The amount of discussions and mixed feedback we have seen tells
me that we have no consenus yet to go forward with this proposal (not
even "very rough").

I have on my TODO list to go through the PI numbers that Alex has posted
and try to figure out how "real" this percieved problem is *today*, and 
then we can go forward with less emotional and more educated discussion.

regards,

Gert Doering
        -- APWG chair
-- 
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