[address-policy-wg] 2015-05 Discussion Period extended until 13 June 2016 (Last /8 Allocation Criteria Revision)

Hi,

On Sun, May 22, 2016 at 12:27:29PM +0200, Wilhelm Boeddinghaus wrote:
> in a membership organisation we have to treat all members equal when it 
> comes to distributing the final IPv4 networks. You cannot take the right 
> to request the final /22 away just because a member had no need so far 
> to ask for it. This should have been put in the policy a few years ago 
> (like "you have 4 years to request your /22") , but you cannot change 
> this today working backward.

We can change the rules for *future* allocations and have done so a few
times in the past... (along that same line of argument, one could have 
said that "you cannot deny future participants a proper needs-based 
*large* allocation" when going to /22).  There is no set-in-stone 
"right to request the final /22" - there's an IPv4 allocation and 
assignment policy, which sets the rules for future allocation/assignment 
requests, and that currently(!) permits allocation of a single /22.

OTOH, I'm not sure if I see a pressing need here - LIRs that haven't
asked for their /22 yet because they don't need it might just never show
up, because they don't need it...

gert
-- 
have you enabled 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 (0)89/32356-444           USt-IdNr.: DE813185279
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: </ripe/mail/archives/address-policy-wg/attachments/20160522/8a2d76ba/attachment.sig>