[address-policy-wg] 2023-01 - New Version Policy Proposal (Reducing IXP IPv4 assignment default size to a /26)

Hi,

I just want to quickly pop in and say that I really agree with Nick in
wanting to avoid these "magic numbers".
I do not know which numbers would be appropriate, but probably
somewhere around 40-45% (instead of 50%).

-Cynthia

On Wed, Apr 26, 2023 at 5:04 PM Nick Hilliard <nick at foobar.org> wrote:
>
> Angela Dall'Ara wrote on 06/03/2023 10:43:
>
> As per the RIPE Policy Development Process (PDP), the purpose of this four-week Discussion Phase is to discuss the proposal and provide feedback to the proposer.
>
>
> two issues:
>
> - I can't work out what the proposed new section 7 is saying.
> - there are a bunch of problematic edge cases associated with section 5. E.g. what happens if an IXP has a /23 and has 254 IP addresses used after 1Y? They will be obliged to downgrade to a /24, according to the current text.  Also I don't know what a special circumstance is.
>
> The problems in section 5 can be fixed easily, but it depends on how the authors want to handle assignment upgrades / renumberings. I'd suggest either dropping the 1Y utilisation requirement to e.g. 40%, or else that if you reach e.g. 80% current usage, you qualify to receive an assignment of 2x the current, up to /22.  Those figures are plucked out of the air btw. The point with them is that they are not 50%, which is obviously a magic number when the natural increase of assignment size would be to double the size of the block.
>
> Nick
>
> --
>
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, get a password reminder, or change your subscription options, please visit: https://mailman.ripe.net/