[address-policy-wg] About the /22 allocation limitation

2014-04-10 12:02 GMT+02:00 Dpto. Datos Television Costa Blanca <
datos at tvt-datos.es>:

> Hi,
>

Hello!


>
> But instead of running into exhaustion in "2 months" we can handle it to
> be "2 years". Please, take in account the time between quotes as an example.
>

When this was discussed, it was essentially agreed on that it was pretty
much irrelevant whether it was N days, weeks, months or years, for any
value of N.


> Should we take more care in "efficient allocations" or "efficient routing
> tables"?
>
Are in the actually routers with problems in the routings tables in the
> same way we have problems with the IPv4 exhaustion?
>

There may be routers with such problems, but AFAICR, routing table lookups
for IPv4 hasn't really been a big issue in quite a few years.

However, maintaining more allocations just to delay the inevitable by a
very small amount of time seems a waste of humans' time and resources.
-- 
Jan
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: </ripe/mail/archives/address-policy-wg/attachments/20140410/cfab47d7/attachment.html>