[address-policy-wg] 2006-05 New Draft Document Published (PI Assignment Size)

Hi,

On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 12:48:58PM +0100, James Blessing wrote:
> On 21 October 2010 12:36, Emilio Madaio <emadaio at ripe.net> wrote:
> 
> >    http://ripe.net/ripe/policies/proposals/2006-05.html
> 
> Either I'm going mental or doesn't the line:
> 
> "Cumulatively, no more than 248 additional IPv4 addresses may be
> assigned to any particular End User for the purposes outlined in
> section 6.10."
> 
> make the proposal completely pointless

It's a "stop the floodgates" clause to try to prevent abuse of this
proposal.

For the intended purpose ("give people a /24 that do not have the
necessary amount of machines and do not want to lie to the NCC") it
should not pose a problem - you have 3 machines plus a router, you
need 4 addresses = /29.  Add 248 addresses, reach /24.

The emphasis is "additional" = "in addition to the addresses the
requester can justify".

The stopgap function is: if the same entity comes back three months
later and asks for another /29-to-be-extended-to-a-/24, they won't
get it.  "Fill your existing /24 first."

If that's not sufficiently clear, we might need to reword.

Gert Doering
        -- APWG chair
-- 
did you enable IPv6 on something today...?

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