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

Am 06.02.2019 um 13:46 schrieb garry at nethinks.com:
>>
>> and then you were presented with the simple flag, "250 GB sufficient: yes/no"
>>
>> What would you choose?
>>
>> My bet is that you would choose "no" and request 1 TB.
>
> Slight difference: we're talking about a scarce resource here, which - depending on your choice - might or might not be available. So the choice is rather:
>
> 1) packs of 250GB, 500GB or 1TB up to a total of 1TB (packs might not be available at the same time)
> 2) 1TB in on pack of 1TB

That's  one thing. The other: what's the amount of recovered space becoming available for redistribution by the RIPE NCC within which timeframe? I've read in some document that RIRs might receive a tenth of IANA's recovered space every 6 months, thus the inital waiting time for a /22 or /24 will be up to 6 months anyway? If e. g. IANA is down to a /17, this makes a /21 for RIPE for that six month period. I'd rather hand that /21 as two /22 to two new LIRs instead of eight /24 to eight new LIRs, since a /24 is basically useless anyway. Especially if you have to wait 6 or more months for it. (Of course, /22 (in up to /24 slices) will mean a much longer waiting time, which makes  IPv6 just more interessting. Or IPv4 brokers.)

> Though, thinking about the billing, RIPE has to (or should) define how to do the billing based on the number of resources ... currently, billing is per resource, not sure if this will be kept if due to availability issues this would remain (in essence, increasing the price for LIRs that have to take multiple /24 instead of one /22) or whether they would still receive their initial fragmented /22 amount of IPs included as "first resource" ...

IIRC, billing discussions are out of scope for the APWG. Besides, billing is not per resource currently, is it?

Regards,
-kai

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: </ripe/mail/archives/address-policy-wg/attachments/20190206/64257529/attachment.html>