[address-policy-wg] 2019-05 New Policy Proposal (Revised IPv4 assignment policy for IXPs)

Consulting the PCH IXP directory as Nick did earlier (as well as the 
Euro-IX one), I think it is also reasonable to say that
allocating a /24 is ambitious for the overwhelming majority of cases.

Only 64 of listed IXPs have equal to, or more than, 100 participants, 
out of 958 IXPs, or about 6.6%.

In this light, perhaps the default allocation discussed in 6.1.4 should 
go down to a /25.

Looking at the the other end, it's not clear to me as to why an 
applicant cannot get more than a /23, if
there is strong evidence necessitating it. To throw some random numbers 
as an example, this could be
by demonstrating 70%-80% use of their current pool and submitting 
projected and historical growth rate data.

Lastly, 6.1.2 mentions that "other uses are forbidden". Policies looking 
to enforce certain conditions are
only meaningful if there is a framework for:
a) Monitoring policy violations with accompanying documentation 
describing frequency, methodology etc.
b) Describing disciplinary actions

Kind regards,
Aris