[address-policy-wg] IXP pool lower boundary of assignments

No. But renumbering an IX is *pain*. A lot of pain. You want to avoid that if possible.
A /26 allows (given that the IX uses about 2-4 IPs itself) about 60 customers.

So according to the numbers, for 70% of the IXes this will never fill up, so no need for renumbering.
Depending on how quickly it filled up, you then go either for a /25 or a /24.

To sum up:
- if you start with a /26 ==> 30% has to renumber
- if you start with a /29 ==> 75% has to renumber ---> more pain!

Makes sense?

best regards
Wolfgang


> Am 1. Nov 2022 um 15:48 schrieb Tore Anderson <tore at fud.no>:
> 
> If not, how exactly would a default
> /29 policy «cripple» an IX from growing past 6 members, or a default
> /28 «cripple» it from growing past 14 members for that matter?

-- 
Wolfgang Tremmel                     

Phone +49 69 1730902 0  | wolfgang.tremmel at de-cix.net
Executive Directors: Ivaylo Ivanov and Sebastian Seifert | Trade Registry: AG Cologne, HRB 51135
DE-CIX Management GmbH | Lindleystrasse 12 | 60314 Frankfurt am Main | Germany | www.de-cix.net