[ipv6-wg at ripe.net] New IPv6 Address Block Allocated to RIPE NCC

Giving /8's now seems quite practical.

On Mon, Jun 14, 2004 at 03:19:37PM +0200, Gert Doering wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> On Mon, Jun 14, 2004 at 05:56:19AM -0700, william(at)elan.net wrote:
> > Personally I don't see anything wrong with IANA reserving /8 for RIPE and 
> > specifying so on its page, but I really don't see why it should immedialy 
> > allocate that much space, as /8 would be what RIPE needs if half of its 
> > current membership requested ipv6 and somehow i dont think this is what 
> > is happening, you dont even have 10% of your membership doing it yet...
> 
> The big advantage of using decent-size blocks is that the respective
> RIRs can use more efficient distribution algorithms (binary-chop, for
> example, see RIPE-261) inside their block.
> 
> Also there is no *reason* for this, except "job security by introducing
> needless bureaucracy".  
> 
> Conservation is not an issue (there are 64 /8s inside FP 001 - giving
> each RIR a /8 will leave 59 /8s, with a high chance that the RIRs will
> not ever come back asking for more), and "we need to make sure that 
> the RIRs know what they are doing" is also a non-issue, regarding the
> given clue distribution at the ICANN / RIR level.
> 
> Nobody has ever given a good reason for this insistence on /23 allocations,
> except that, years ago, the IESG had recommended this (for the initial
> ICANN -> RIR allocations).
> 
> Gert Doering
>         -- NetMaster
> -- 
> Total number of prefixes smaller than registry allocations:  60210  (58081)
> 
> SpaceNet AG                 Mail: netmaster at Space.Net
> Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14   Tel : +49-89-32356-0
> 80807 Muenchen              Fax : +49-89-32356-299