[address-policy-wg] 2019-02 New Policy Proposal (Reducing IPv4 Allocations to a /24)

> On 4 Feb 2019, at 13:27, Sander Steffann <sander at steffann.nl> wrote:
> 
> It seems you misunderstand the proposal. This policy agrees with you that /22s should be allocated until RIPE NCC runs out. It is about what happens afterwards. We create a waiting list with either /22 or /24 allocation size.
> 
> - Choosing /22 means that the waiting list is unmanageable and therefore (mostly) useless.
> - Choosing /24 means that the waiting list is manageable and a bit less useless.
> 
> We're not suggesting to change the allocation size now, only for the waiting list.

I’m not convinced there’s any point in having a waiting list or maintaining an expensive bureauracy to oversee the dregs of the dregs of v4. IMO, once the NCC is unable to allocate /22s to new LIRs, it’s game over. v4 is finally exhausted. Get over it.

A policy to deal with whatever /24s the NCC might find stuffed down the back of the sofa will be more bother than its worth. Unless someone can provide compelling arguments -- ie there’s still a lot of v4 for the NCC to allocate -- I just don’t see the point. Sorry.

How much of this hypothetical /24 space does the NCC hold anyway? How long might it last?