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

* Wolfgang Tremmel

> when opening a new exchange there are no customers connected yet, all you have is a business plan. So everything is kind of speculative and you can easily adjust your plan that you need a /24 - so why add additional workload to the NCC to review  business plans? 

Hi,

Using this rationale, why stop at /24? Why not give /23s by default - that is the only way to ascertain that the NCC does not have to review business plans, after all? I don't see how /24 is special in this context.

Also note that «stopping the NCC from reviewing business plans» is not a stated objective of this policy proposal.

In any case, if the IXP manages to fill up its /x with members the policy allows for replacing it with with a /x+1.

> An honest IXP operator can request something smaller if he knows that the exchange will not grow beyond a small number of customers within the first 5 years or so.

You are implying that small IXPs that do not need more than /{27..25} are being dishonest if they don't say so instead of taking the default /24 on offer.

Note that there is nothing in the proposed policy that requires or even encourages them to do so, however. So why would they?

Tore