[address-policy-wg] 2012-04 New Policy Proposal (PI Assignments from the last /8)

* Remco Van Mook

> This all impacts, in a positive or negative way, how much future
> there is in our final /8 policy. I'd like to think that we made a
> well-considered decision back then, and if we're going to make a
> fundamental change like this one I'd like to see some numbers in an
> impact analysis. Based on current distribution, how much space do we
> anticipate will fall under the final /8 policy, how much of it will
> be allocated in /22 PA and how much will be allocated in /24 PI?
> Given the 'one size fits nobody' nature of the final /8 policy, this
> would be about the number of allocations/assignments done so far, not
> the size.

Hi,

So, by looking in today's delegated-ripencc-latest file... We need to
look back on 105 days of delegations in order to as close as possible to
a /8s worth of addresses handed out. The numbers are:

Total number of delegated addresses: 17,156,520
Total number of delegations: 1,696

Total number of allocated addresses: 14,784,512 (86.17%)
Total number of allocations: 701 (41.33%)

Total number of assigned addresses: 2,372,008 (13.83%)
Total number of assignments: 995 (58.67%)

If I, eh, "simulate" the last /8 policy + 2012-04 by assuming that every
assignment is a /24 and every allocation is a /22, we would need to look
back 3071 days to get to the equivalent of a /8:

Total number of delegated addresses: 16,779,776
Total number of delegations: 28,787

Total number of allocated addresses: 12,547,072 (74.77%)
Total number of allocations: 12,253 (42.56%)

Total number of assigned addresses: 4,232,704 (25.23%)
Total number of assignments: 16,534 (57.44%)

Note that neither of these filter away additional delegations to LIRs
and EUs, something which won't happen under the last /8 policy.

I don't make the claim that these numbers necessarily are meaningful or
even relevant to the discussion, though. You be the judge of that...

> Everybody who wants to connect his organisation to the internet is
> going to need at least some IPv4 address space for the time being, so
> why screw it up for new entrants?

Indeed. I suspect that this the exact problem 2012-04 aims to deal with,
as the current last /8 policy *does* «screw it up for new entrants»
[that aren't LIRs].

I have a couple of questions regarding the proposed policy, though (not
directed at you Remco):

1) Under the proposed policy, would an LIR be eligible for both a /22 PA
allocation and a /24 PI assignment, or is it either-or? (I think the
proposal as it currently stands is the former, but is that intentional?)

2) Will ripe-530 section 6.10 (minimum assignment=/24 if multihoming) be
in effect under 2012-04?

Best regards,
-- 
Tore Anderson
Redpill Linpro AS - http://www.redpill-linpro.com