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

Hi,

while the current policy does permit the /22 allocation be made from
smaller blocks it does not in it's current form allow smaller allocations.

I do support this policy as it does allow more new comers to the market to
get at least a /24 which is still better than nothing.

I think that any consecutive changes to this policy regarding the size of
allocations will not be brought to light unless the prefix filters will
allow smaller routes.

About the financial viability I think that from the RIR standpoint it
doesn't pose a problem as the RIR should have the same amount of work with
a LIR that has /22, /24 or any other allocation.

Best regards,
Uros Gaber

On Mon, Feb 4, 2019 at 3:47 PM Martin Huněk <hunekm at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I don't think that we have to change current policy at all.
>
> Current policy allows to get /22 divided to smaller blocks, so it doesn't
> have to be changed just because of this.
>
> My personal opinion on IPv4 exhaustion is that it would be better to come
> sooner than later. Any means of slowing exhaustion down would just prolong
> the IPv4 agony. Reaching zero free pool is the only way.
>
> Please stop trying to conserve any more IPv4 addresses, IPv4 has reached a
> dead-end, let it die peacefully.
>
> Best Regards,
> Martin Hunek
>
> Dne pondělí 4. února 2019 13:04:26 CET, Marco Schmidt napsal(a):
> > Dear colleagues,
> >
> > A new RIPE Policy proposal, 2019-02, "Reducing IPv4 Allocations to a /24"
> > is now available for discussion.
> >
> > This proposal aims to reduce the IPv4 allocation size to a /24 once the
> > RIPE NCC is unable to allocate contiguous /22 ranges.
> >
> > You can find the full proposal at:
> > https://www.ripe.net/participate/policies/proposals/2019-02
> >
> > As per the RIPE Policy Development Process (PDP), the purpose of this
> > four week Discussion Phase is to discuss the proposal and provide
> > feedback to the proposer.
> >
> > At the end of the Discussion Phase, the proposer, with the agreement of
> > the WG Chairs, will decide how to proceed with the proposal.
> >
> > We encourage you to review this proposal and send your comments to
> > <address-policy-wg at ripe.net> before 5 March 2019.
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Marco Schmidt
> > Policy Officer
> >
> >
> >
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: </ripe/mail/archives/address-policy-wg/attachments/20190204/a237c0f7/attachment.html>