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

> 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.)
Why is a /24 useless? It's routable on the internet and fully usable.
Yes, you can't aggregate it to form larger blocks, but considering the
number of /24 already present in the global routing table (many/most of
which are de-aggregated prefixes, presumably for multi-homed purposes),
if anybody decides to filter them generally would cause major problems ...
>
>> 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?

True. Just thought I'd throw it in there as "fairness" was mentioned
earlier. From the last time I looked at the RIPE bill we were charged
for every network block we have - with the same yearly recurring price
per resource no matter if it's the /16, /19 or a /24 ... (formerly, this
had been a one-time assignment fee, but in order to allow for easier
recovery of unused IPs, RIPE changed this some time back ...)

According to the 2019 billing scheme, this is still unchanged, though I
reckon it does not apply to PA space:

"The separate charge of EUR 50 per Independent Number resource
assignment will be continued. Independent number resources are: IPv4 and
IPv6 PI assignments; Anycasting assignments; IPv4 and IPv6 IXP
assignments;"

So fragmenting the /22 into /24s would not be of consequence to an LIR
anyway, at least not financially. So strike my argument about that part.

-garry