[address-policy-wg] [policy-announce] 2012-04 New Draft Document Published (PI Assignments from the last /8)

Hi,

>>> i can not speak to the intent in the ripe region.  but the principal
>>> intent of the final /8 policy in the apnic region was so that *new*
>>> entrants could get one small piece of the pie.
>> 
>> This was also the original reasoning here in the RIPE region.
> 
> If so, the letter of the policy contradicts this - there is no mention
> of only "new" requestors, rather any LIR that can demonstrate a need
> will be assigned one last /22. One could reasonably assume that the intention has then failed in the
> original policy and is not a valid argument against the proposal...

Correct. That is why I said 'original reasoning'. At some point it was decided (as in: declared consensus on) that existing LIRs also should get some addresses for NATs, proxy servers etc. The RIPE NCC can double in member-count while still being able to give every LIR a /22. But the reason the policy was proposed in the first place was for the new entrants.

Met vriendelijke groet,
Sander Steffann